waterbirds \u0026 wetland recreation handbook. a review of issues and management practice

$: Waterbirds \u0026 Wetland Recreation Handbook. A Review of Issues and Management Practice$

Waterbirds & WettandRecreation

review of issues andHandbookmanagement practice

/;\

-*!!

Jeff KirbyNick Giles

Nick DavidsonMyrfyn Owen

and Chris Spray

NORTHUMBRIANWATER

With the support of

: ==\f\,1,' tTt11rr \\.lk I Fi;irJNATURE

Pubtished by The Witdfowl & Wetlands Truststimbridge, Gtoucestershire GL2 7BT

Registered charity no. 1030884

T +44 1011453 891900 wwww.wwt.org.uk

First edition published June 2004

o wwT lsBN 0 900806 50 8

cover photos: Great crested Grebe by 14artin Senior/WWT Windsurfer by WwT

Printed byAtden Press, osney Mead, oxford 0X2 0EF

ContentsACKI{OWLEDGEMEI,ITS

FORETI'ORD

INTRODUCTION

'I . BACKGROUT,ID

'1.1 Purpose and scope ol the handbook'1.2 Cons.rvation conlext'1.3 Conflictr ot interesb

2. WETLANDS FOR WATERBIRDS

It

1

3

5

2.1 lntroduction2.2 Places to breed2.3 Places lo moull2.4 Places to winter2.5 l{etworks for migralion2.6 Safe havens2.7 lmplication3 lor recreation mallagers2.8 Are waterbirds a conshaint on recr.ation?

2.8,1 Water quality and public health2.8.2 Predation of lish siock2.8.3 Habitet dogradation2.8.4 Prolected speciar and protectcd wetlands

2.9 lmplicatiom for wateabiad conserualion

3. WATER.BASED SPORT AND RECREATION

9't3

't6

21

n21

AA25

n88

3.1 lntroduction3.2 Current policy on the proyision of water-based rccr€ational tacilities 3l)

3.2.,l Govemm€nt policy 3l3.2.2 Local and regional policier ?2

3.2.3 Waier company policies 32

3.3 Participation in waler-ba3ed spods and rccrealion 333.3.1 Angting 333.3.2 BoatiDg 343.3.3 Witdtowting 373.3.{ lntormal rccrcalion 37

1. HOW RECREAIION AFFECTS WATERBIRDS

4.1 lntroduction4.2 Evidence lor r€crealion-iduced mortality

4.2.'l ortalitycorcepts4.2.2 Shooting moftality4.2.3 Angling litter4.2.4 Lead poisoning and olher shooting ellecls4.2.5 Predation of wat6rbird64.2.6 lhe significance of recrealion-induced mortality

39

30

39

11

12

44

46

46

4.3 Disturbance 47

4.3.1 Shooting disturbance il8

1.3.2 Angling 50

4.3.3 Non-motorised crafl 52

4.3.4 Motorised water sporls 55

4.3.5 lnformal recGation 55

4.3.6 lnteF and inka- specific variation 58

4.3.7 Habituation and facililation 58

4.3.8 lndirect effecls 59

4.3.9 The significance of recreational disturbance 59

4.4 Habitat inlluences and competition 62

4.4.1 The collection and use of bait for angling 62

4.4.2 Fish slocking and fish-waterbird competition 63

4.4.3 Waterbird releases and competition with native species 65

4.4.4 Boal use, wash and associated pollution 67

4.4.5 Wetland management for sport 67

4.4.6 The significance o, habitat influences and competition 69

4.5 Overall skength of effects and impacts of recr€ation on watedirds 70

4.6 Limitations of lhe science and guidance for the fulure 71

5. MANAGEI{EI{T FOR RECREATION &WATERBIRD CONSERVATION

74

71

71

74

80

81

84

86

87

88

88

92

91

98

98

101

102102

103

104

104

104

t05

r06

5.1 lnhoduction5.2 Mrnagemenl framework and process

5.2.1 Wat.rbird cons€rvrtion responsibilities5.2.1.1 Ramsar Convention and Birds oirective5.2.,l,2 Habitals Directive

5.2.,l.3 Agreement on the Conservation ol African-Eurasian Migratory Walorbirds

5.2.'1.4 Action plans

5.2.2 lntegnted planning and management

5.2.3 EIA and cosl-benefil analyris5.3 Managcmenttechniques

5.3.1 Sites & species management5.3.'1.1 Habitat management

5.3.1.2 Lendscape design5.3.1.3 Species management

5.3.1.4 l{onitoring & research

5.3.1.5 Spatial zonation

5.3.,l.6 Temporal zonalion

5.3.2 Participant & equipment management

5.3.2.,| Codes of conduct5.3.2.2 Compensation5.3.2.3 Education & interpretation5.3.2.4 Participant limitation5.3.2.5 Patrolling5.3.2.6 Regulation/modification of equipment

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOI,Ii,!ENDATIONS

7. APPENDICES

'1. Scientific names of species mentioned in the {ext2. Some contacts in the t K3. References

110

112

111

AcltnowledgementsWe vish to thml those people who he\Ed B to put di$ Hmdboot togeth€i At n Dr@itt comenteal on drftvetsions on beh.lf of E glish Nahre, Gofi Nickolds for Sl]ltnTmt Warer, AndyTorDinsLi forThmes Watdand lbny Richridson, Dr Md[ O'C,nfle]1, D.vid Chabberlain md Dr Baz Hugh€s @ behar of dle V,itdfowt &rweilands TrusL Nigel Holmes dd the Etrvndrreft Agency made usetul comots oo drzft ldsions

The project !A supponed Enancialy by Selefr Trot Wate! Tharnes Watet, B.glish Narre md Th€ ENium€nt

ForewordMDch has been [aitten about thc lo$ dd degodxtion .)f errlmds; .kain.ge schehes, polution, ovd ahsiractioflaI tate th& toll aod so thc vedmd wildlife dut depdds upoo thcm is tke.tened. The Vildfowl & werlands'irust

CifwT) and otlers stdve to Fotcct weddds and their Lrlodivcnity from such perils as a maner ofcouBe. ItreWatetbitds aod Wcdmd Redeation H,ndbook does .or sccl to address rhis tundamcntal consdvation concern.Instead tle book focuses on the bddce thar needs to bc sttu k between the need s ofsatdbnds that depend onwcdmd hal,it ts end $e ever-growing iotercst in ujng bodies ofwiter for rdeadon.

When lreter Scott first came to Slimbridge in 1945, he did i,,s 2 hm on z mission. He kne!-dut rle SUmIJridg.foreshore on tlre Sflem Eshury was the best pldce t{) see the thousands olwhitc fronted (ieese tlar migrarcdft{,h their Siberiafl bieedrig g1omds to spend t1le \dnte. here. He also hopcd ro sec rle uncomon Iissd \t/hitek{fted (ioose md in this qucst hc Nas successful- He ws so inspircd at dris goose qEctacular that hc rook thedecision b setdc at Slimbridgc and esablish what m to becomc thc vodd fimous Wildfovl & Weddds Trust.

There ws, hovcver, m ime.tiate issue to be resolved. Scott had maged tu get closc to rhese w d bnds brafptoaching steakhny from behind fie sea vall and satching the b;ds froh a pillbor, ironica\ now heing used toobsenc wdcome visitob from oft$easl But how vould he l]r]Dge t , share his ctrthusiash 6r &c birds a.d fo1thcb dmtic wedand habitrt with others, vfthour distubi,s drem dd drreatening the integnty of t},c vqlmds.2pe drdt dsured dreir sufrival? Well. ftom dar pillbo!, rhe brd obserqtion hide that we now take forgrdted evolved, and bird vatchiogbccme a ve5, popul,r prstihe-

-As mote bitds wrc vicwed disaetely, interest in ildr protection blossohed, so mu.h s), that in 2003, \lnflT's nineUK centes wclcomed oler 750,000 people to ns ftsefres. -l'his pubtic acclmxrion has encoumged m inrcrest inwterbirds aod thci habitats droqhout dr votld. At Slimbridgc m.l trcyond, ihete is nov a succcssful mi\tureof disrubmcc ftee bird resdves dnd rccteation, md ftom this djoymeit of weda.ds comes a bettd undentandingof drc prcssues on dr nxtu2L cnvitonhent.

This is pdh,Ps not cohpletelr surprising as we a[ h2ve a n,tubt af6dry with wtcr we lihe t(, be in h or oc& n.Itedi,a $e ducks is often the classic childhood hehory dd \V\vT hrs rezvalen.d dis pdticular pleasuc tovisitots of a[ ages. These ed]y dperidces often lead to the recognitio. that uater h,s many uses, ftom dinliing tosimming, ftom indutly to yachting el wotth to wildlife ed poplc.

I{s.ddds ,re sen ,s x resource, they vill bc bcttcr valucd by a[ which hxs to he ultimately good for dt enuron-ment. wlCI hopes th2t the publication of dris book vil hdp lead t,2 bettd Edcrstmding of the n.ds nlwaterbirds and hov thel may be ablc to exist in hmony with rede2Eon t use on wcddds. W\vT is graretul ro 211

th()se vho hare nadc its production possible, wi6 p,ti.uld dlanls due b Northmbdan w,teL

WWT, Slirnbndge 2003

vl

IntroductionMaoy of od wddds in the L[< de m,n-h2dc and Ncn moie, the v2st haionq,, h.ve heen hcaviiy modiEed onevay or mothet nr us bI han. It has been esrhatcd rhat there de sohe 84,000ha ofinland vatcr in Xnglrnd atrdWales, of which 25% alonc is accounted ror by public water supply ftsrvoirs of vryng kird' To this cdn bezdded 140,000k! ofrivcs, 3,000[h orcanals md the esturies and inshorc warers rh2r surou our co*rl]ne.Togetler, this reprcsdlrs a signiE lrq but finitc cnviromental resolace, aglnNt whi.h hust bc scr a gromsdemmd for rede2tion,l dd non-rccrcatioml use of dE s

Thc impon nce of$e* ,niEcial habitats in Biirin has inciezsed considealrry nr recenr decadcs, especially f()rdabbiins ducks dd as goose toosts (Owd.// 1986). Nine drif,cial sites have heen dcsignated as rntehationalrInponalt and dcsignated as Ramsd sites dd/or Special Prorection Aieas undtr the EC Bnds D;ecnve (Muwove.rd12001). The covenrment rcg ds the staie orour wetlmd birds as one of6eii Qualitl oflife Indicato's.

Evd hexviry bodified md mmde water bodics can dselop m importznt (nrflatiotr v.]ue. For cxmple, forcdtiin bitd species such as cadsall. Tufted Duck, Pchdd md Shoveld, re*frons md gr2ftl Fits are the mosrdtensively ued habitat jn thc UK during wintlr. Of fie 370 rsdv&s in Eogtatut dd Wates oMcd by the w.rerconp,nies, nearly halfhavc eeas design,ted as Sitcs of Speci,l Scientifi. Inrercs! widl nuherous bftd hides ,ndot11et racilities for bn l wat hins.

Estimatcs for the nmber ofpeople iotdested in water spons var)' froh 5 7 milion in thc UK a Egues rrohthc 1994 UKDay VisitSu$eyehphasne rheimpondce of waret2spdrof the ieisde er:fcricnce more thd 120mi[ion ]eisuie day usirs wde hade to cma.ls md rilds .lone; dgling participmts wde esnmakd at some :1.3

milion people; dd reserv.)irs such as Ruddd dd Kieldd have become mjor todisr dcstinations in then omights.

B..k in 1996, *re Bdtish Omithologists'Unjon a"d rhe Ifl dfovl & wedmds Tiusr orgdised d inrernationalcoflference in Bdstol on 'Watobirds aod Rcceation: Considentions f(r thc sustain2ble haflagcmcnt ofWetlafldJ'. Just pdor to d;s, Nord,umbrim V/atd, who becahe dr lead sponsor nr the confclcnce, had comissioncd the \VV/T'S weddds Advisory Service ro mddt Le a Mj()r nkee Ieai study of wrerbirds on ett theirresdvons, dd to inRsdgzte the interaction betwed c.reanon ad coflseNarion interests. Ar thc cnd of theconference itwas felt fr2 afier tlan prcdu.e a fornit edited vol@e orcoflfden e Fapers, W\VI md Norituh-bdm Watd reuld mrk tmtds thc Foduction of a specific handbook on the mdaSemot of porotiat arss ofconflict betrtil warerbids md vedmd reoeaiion-

This, t]le icsulting boolq goes much fur&er tlan t]le origiflal2lms ofthe.onfde.cc, and tbJough rhe work otrheauthors md Just Ecology has *panded gr@t]I \ve havc bccn able to include d1e tesulrs of more iecdftesedch @dto cov{ deas that wde previolsly ohitted. It is abovc aI now a pncrical hddbook for mmagemdt wlrh thecmphasis ftmlv on unddstandiry the sciencc, conscnatio! values and pr2.nces associared with dre hregratedmdagmcnr olv edr'nd: in, b^l-F M'(rbird. d, d i.r. aJon.

Yll

Chris SprarIINYIRONMENT DIRECTOR

NoRTIII]MBRIAN \X7 'IFII I IMI-IFI)

JefJKitbyItr{NACING DIRECTORJUST ECOLOGY(EN1IRONMEN-a r. CONSULI^NC1J I_Tl)

vlll

1. BACKGROUND

1.1 Purpose and s.ope ol the handbook

This handbook is about wetlands as places {orhumans to enjoy rccrcational activiq/ and as habi-tats suppotinS very significant waterbirdpopulations. It Iocuses on v/hat we Lnow aboutthe interactions betwee.n the two and on manage-mert approaches that rnay remove or alleviate anyconflicts of interest- Geogaphically, it draws onbJomation from most parts o{ the world. How-ever/ our emphasis is on Europe, where recreationon wclland, i\ inl(nse. wilh Credt BritaLn gi\ enthe most comprehmsive treatm!'nt in this handbook. However, many of the issues nised, and thesolutions prcsented, willt e mor€ widely apptica-ble, making the handbook oI inter€st to an inter-national rcadership.

We folow the'Ramsar Convenlion' for our definition of wetlands (Box 1.1), this d€'finition hav-ing been adoptcd by more than 60 govemmentsthroughout the world Ior wetland managementand conseration puIposes. Wedands of couseexfubilpnormous di\ ersrty accordtrrS lo lheu ori-

8irs, Seosraphical location, water re8ime, chem-istry, dominant ptants and soil or sediment char-acteristics (Finlayson & Moser 1991). They mayvary also within a single wetland arca and overtime, and many different types ofwetland may befoLrnd in cl.\'pr.\lmiq. lorming not ju-t d iJferent ecosystems, but wholly different landscapes.Whilst aspects of this handbook are relevant tothe consewation and management o{ most o{ th€sewetlarlds, our iocus is mah{y on estuaries, lakesand man-made wedands, such as rcservotus andgravel extraction pits. These are indeed thewetlands used most for human recreation.

Wetlands teem with animal and plant liJe butwaterbirds are perhaps dle most visible and wellknown oI dre many species present in wetlandenvircrunents. With over 150 European bird spe-cies intirnately linked with wedands for their sur-vival, waterbtuds are the Iocus of this handbook.

Ol1I definition of 'waterbirds' is broad and prag-maric. ll in(ludcsJll wcllffiJ hird ldmilie! moni-lored b\ inlemariun.rl.onsen arion organi,arion.involved in wedand surveillance (r-9. Rose & S(ott1994, 1997). 'Wild{owl', namely swans, geese anddu. k.. dre m, ludpJ a. B cll .j- h.rder,,o\crm8oysiercatcler, avocet ploveE and sandpipers; andsome other wetland hrd families notably gulls andterns, and herons and cgrets. We also include spe-cies ftom other families that are ecologically de-pendent on wetlands: dive$, gebes, cormorant,coor and rail.: river bdsed .pecre. -uch a. kinS-

Box 1,i : What are wettands?Exactly what constitules a 'weiland' has always b€en !h6

srbjecl oi debate. nol srensr4gv given he e.oraousva €ty or wer l-doila, lypes and rhe dit,LulriFs invo'veo n

defiring'hei boutanes {trh a1y orecision Tl.e 197'

'Convention on Welland8 oI ldternalional lmponaneEspecially as Wa?riowl I'abildl' (usually (alled r.e'Ramsar coiveniion') uses a delinition lhat conveys lheerseniial character or {olldnds, as w6'l as 'mptyrng lhe

complexily involved (Davis 1994). ll d€linos lhem as:'aeas af natsh, ten, peallard ot wale4 thethq oalualat adincial, petMnent at lenpo?t!, wln w@ that bstatc ot flowinq, fi*jh, bdckish at sal! includin, areAs olnarire vatot, the deplh of bhich al low tide does not

ercaed 6 a [itst avet 19 . Wilhin lnh delinilion, 4ve

major relland sysl€mi ae re@snised Gee rudher rMaltbyi9s,):

ma ne: co.sta! wallandr lncludlnq rockyshoEs, l.goons and cola! r6.fs

eslu.dne: including de,las, 63tuados,.tidalma6h6a aid m.ngrovo slamps

lacullrlno: wellands associat€d with lak6s

dv€dn6: w€llrnds .rong ver. and stroams,Including llood0l.in!

paluslrin6r marsh6., !$ahps rnd peairands

Artilicial wettands, such a; ce paddies, fish and shrimpponds. larm oonds. resoryoirs e\t acl:on Dils. se(aSefams, unals and sarl pa.6, ,dd lo lhe di?e.sity of

we and lvpes

fisher grey wagtail and dipper; reedbed specicssuch as bittem, nrarsh hallicy, rced and sedgewarbler and bearded reedling, ard open waierspecies such as osprey. lnevitably, not all of thesespecies have had the same level of research devoted to them arld herce the bulk o{ the material inthis handbook rcfers to the wacters artl wildfowlscrs/ stricfo, groups for which th€re is by Iar themo,t inJorm.rlron. sci ntur, ndmF. i,rdll-pe, ie.mentioned in the handbook are provided inAppendix 1

As well as a place for v,,ildliJ€, weilands provide adiversitv of recrcational opporunities {or people,Jnd manUnil ion. ot p,ople pnjo\ bpints inwetlands for this purpose. B(ause of this the gov-emmentregaids the state ofour weilands and theirbnds as one oftheir Q dlity oflifelndicitots DEFRA1999. Growth in traditional activities, such aswalkin& horse din& angling and wildfowliry,has been complemented by the introductior oIneh(r r, ti\ ilre- .u!h J. nountain hil rn8.pamgliding and the introduction of personal wa-tcrcraft ('jet skis'). Throughout ih€ developedwoild, rccreation is important to everyone's qual-iiy of IiJe and the amount of time devoted io it arldthe demand for facilities are $owint. ln Britain,for example, there might bc as manv as 62 millionpeople around the year 2030 and thus the demandsfor new forms o{ recreatio& and other leisurc activitics, will continue to grow, in some casesputting pressure on the environmeni (HMSO1994b). In Britain, around 15 % o{ holidays are ac-tiwity-based with one third of these involving wa-ter-related recreatio& especially boating and {ish-in8.

ln this handbook, we {ocus on recreaiional activi-ties of particular signilicance for waterbirds, whichwe Srorp inio five main categories:

of recreational activiiies on waierbirds. It must berecognised that ihere is an important differencebetwcen ert ts and i pa.ts (see Box 1.2) but borhare relevant to the content of ihis handbook- Thisunderstood, the handbook should allow the rcr:reation managu to know wh.'n ellects alld impactsare likely to rnatter and \ ,hc'ther it is possible tomitigate against ihem with appropriate action.Case studies are used to iilustrate a range of inreractions and the success of a ra.nge of maaagement

Box 1.2: Effects and ImpactsSludles assessing the signili.ane of mans aclivl es on

wildlli€ have olten refer.ed io 'efiecrs' and 'ifirpacts,iooseri and wiihoul deiinition.

Here we deiine an EFFECT on a bnd as any noticeabtechaige ln behaviour, phvsical or chemical state lh3l isbrouqht aboul by an ertema nfluence such asdinL,bance E/aTples o'efF.r( ,o"td Ictrde sroppilqfeoding and looking up lo obseoe a boal an induc€d

.crease tr adElal:r !,ooucron dJ" ro sres: seinni!away irom a wading anglgr or flying away at lhe sound oia gunshot. Eifects can be compensared for.

-.d'#

anqling: game, coa6e and sea anglng

hechan caly powered waler spons: watersk nq power boalng iet skiinq and motor

non-mechan caly powered water sports:

sar ng, w ndsurfinq canoe nq, row nq, and scuba

dvngshoot ng: widlowlng only

iniorma recreaton b rdwatch ng natural

h story, pholography walk nq and swimm ng

In producinS this handboo( our overall aims areio provide a balanced view of waterbird and rec-reational interactiorc, and to offe'r practical ad-vice for minimising the adverse effects and impacts

solutions. However, the handbook does not oflerdetailed management solutions for e.very situation.There are no such magic {ormulae that wi]] workin every irlstance, but there are general principlesthat can be applied and a wealth of practical experience on which to draw. Each real li{e problemneeds to be considered individualy, using teamsof appropriately qualified people to car:ry our ap-prJi.als o\ er adequate I'me period. and lo devicesolutions.

ln sumnary, this handbook has been producedIor interested scientists, ornithologists, sports en-thllsiasts and other users of the courEyside, aswel as wate$hd/wetland contacts and site managers in goverftnents, local government and non-govemmental conseNation, developmenr, plannhg and sports agencies. It is offered as a bal-anced account of the interactions betweenwaterb ds and rccreation - a contibution towardsraising awareness of waterbirds and wetlands. Itfocuses on a topic of intercst to many people; a toolto be used which should help to discouragewetland degadatio4 and a contribution towardssustainable development in wetlands Ior bothwildlife and people.

'1.2 Conservation contexl

The habitats considered here - wedands - haveplayed a crucial role in human history, probablysupporting major stages in the evolution of life it-self and accommodating human settlementlt fromearly Fehistoric times (Maltby 1991)- Werlandshave a wide range of values dtat arc essential for

"upportin8 planl and dnimdl l c dnd ror mdin-taining the quality of the environment (Box 1.3).The interactions between t}le main wetland ele-meflts (water, sojl, nutdents, plants and animals)allow wetlands to perform these tunctions and to

generate healthy plant, wildlife, fishedes and for-est resources. The combination of these Iunctionsarld products, together with the natural and cul-tural values of wetlands means that rhese ecosys-tems are of {:dtical importance to people. Manywe0ard. Pro!,tde Bood opporhni tic. for economjcactivities, including recreatio& and susrain densepopulations o{ Iish, livestock or wildliJe. Toda,wetlands continue to be essential to the h€alth,welfate and sa{ety of millions of people Slobally(Rarnsar Convention Bureau 2000).

Despite this, wetlands have been destroyed anddeSraded paiticularly throughouttheindustrialised worl4 mair{y drc to drainage, lard reclama-tio& polution and over-exploitation of wetlandrcsources (Fidayson & Moser 1991, EC Com 1995).Wetland losses have lreen severe. As an exarnple,Figue 1.1 (from Dahl 1990) shows the differenc€between the distribution of wetlands some 200

Figue 1 1 LN of retlands in setecied states oi the lSA(ron Dahl 1990)

yearc ago arld at the end o{ the 1980s in the USltthe lower map shows percentage loss between the1780s alrd the 1980s in each of the States. Clearty,losses, even in recent times, have been both wide-spread and dramatic.

Wclland. hdve been ma..ivcly redu, cd m d red inBdtain and Europe also. Hollis & Iones (1991) sug-gest that more has been lost here lhan anywhereelse in the world. The common and impoftant

D

causes of global wetland degmdation and loss aredescribed inBox 1.4.

This destuction and degadation of wetlands isnot only damaging to society but it leads to inher-ent loss o{ biodivercity the variety of life formsaround us, including the genetic and moryhological variability within a sp€cies afld the assem-blag." of pl.rnls. anirndl- and micro.organi.m\which together {onn their ecosystems and naturalhabitats. This goes against the Fincipl€s of sus-tainable development (Box 1.5) "developmert6atmeets the n€€ds of the piesent without compro-mising the ability of tuturc genentions to meet theirown needs" (World Commission on Environmmtand Development 1984. This handbook has beenprodu.ed becau.p betland dcgraddrion.an include non-sustainable recreational activities. Itshould be of great value to the many people responsible for the protection a]Id management o{wetland habitats, including their huinan usa8e.

1.3 Conflicts of interest

For over 30 yea$, consewationists have been concemed that Breation may lead to a d!'cline in iheameniiy and wildli{e values o{ sites (e.8. Atkiruon-Wiles 1969, Foman 1958, Morzer-Brujns 1952Tuite cf al 1983). Waterbids and recreation areinleniive u.ersofwc'tldnd dred. dnd t}leir requir+ments often overlap, with rcsulting conflict be-tween the defenders oI wildtife and the devoteesoI wetland-based rccreation. This has triggered anumber of delarled reyiews ol lhe impdcts or reL -rcatio[ $ough thes€ have often only focused ondiiturban.e eFfe(1.. lor Brilain. e\rellent revrewshave been provided by NCC/RSPB (1988), sun-marised by Ward (:1990) and Ward & Andrews(19%), and by Liddle & Scorsie (1980), Hockin ril11. (1992), Davidson & Rothwell (1993), Land UseConsultants (1994), Sidaway (1994) and Hill uf rlaee\.

Wlilst dilfering in scop€ and detail, these studiesshare at least one important c(nrlusion. They showthat hurnan redeational activity often has impor-tant consequences for waterbirds. Reueationalactivity may djrecdy impact on waterbirds t}rorghmortality and distubance, whilst sl1.h activitymay rcsult in habitat loss, degradation and reduc-tions in the food srpplies of birds (Box 1.6).

Another common conclusion is that effects andimpacts are not easy to assess. This is because thereare many interacting factorc that ca]l influe.nc€ th€

numbers, distribution or behaviour of animal spe.cies. For example, natuml causes of redistuibutionfor waterbirds include succession in aquatic eco-systems, cl1anges in food supplies, movements tobreedinS grounds and adverse weather condi-tions. When assessinS the effects of recreatio& it isnecessary to take suL h (a, tors inlo d(Lounti ed.icrsaid than done. Also, the effects and impacts ofr€creational activity seem to vary in relation to thesp€cies of waterbirds involved, their use of thewaterbod, the Fes€nce of altemative sites nearb,and the tr,pe and intensity of rccrcational activi-tics. It is thus a complex subiect. Overall though itis clear that rccreational activiry can cause fluc-tuationi in btud numbeE, distribution and behav-iour, and this may influence the nature conseFation value o{ particular sites. What remains par-ticularly unclear is whether there is a lon8-termimpact o{ reoeation on bird populations, in temsof motality or breeding success.

It is important to remember that the relationshipsbelBem rcsedtron, wdlerblrd" dnd thpir en\ uon-mcnts are neither simple nor one-sided. Indeedby aocusing almost exclusiv+ on potentialy harn-tul impJct5. many re\ ipB -.md 5tudre. havp givcnthe ilnprcssion that rccreational activities are especially hamtul. The local impacts of recrcationcan be se ous and rcquire management action.However, there have b€€n national and regionalassessments that have shown non-recreationalimpa(t nn hJbitals (..8.land useLtunBe., as"oci-a tcd de"rruction and pollu rion) to be fdr mo re "eri-ous for fte survival oI species than recreation(Tuite 1982, Watmough 1983a&b, NCC/RSPB1984, Sidaway 1994, Sidaway & Thompson 1991).

The task of the recreation manager is to balanceany possible harmful effects that recreation mayhave on the environment agairst tlrc considerablerdnSe o( benFrit Ihdt \o mffy people deri! e From

enjoying the counhyside- The best examples oImulti-11se indicate that it js possible to take accountof all users' needs and provide opportunities Iorrecreation as well as secudng good habitats for

There llray even be beneficial effects of rccr€ationon waterbirds, for example when birds are fed bythe public in u$an and suburban areas or by or-ganisations such as the Wildfowl & WetlandsTmst. However not often do these benefit overallpopulations, a{{ecting a Iew tame alld habituatedindividuals. Othff sites may well be created forrecreation, which are subsequ€ntly adopted bybirds-

There are also the consequences for the recreationalmanager and usex of havinS waterbirds present

on sites used actively {oI recrcation, and of themeasrres taken to protect wate$ilds. Large nurn-bers of waterbirds may be noisy throuShout thedaylight hours. They may deposit smelly Suanoon nesting islands and eat large quantities of fishin competition with anglers. They may def€cate

into lakes and rcseFoirs where they feed or roost

(and so may add food poisoning organisms if theyhave Ied on rubbish tips) and add nutrients to thewater (which may lead to blooms of toxic algae orcyanobacteria). Furftemore these birds may bea{forded protected status and may reside onwetland sit€s that are therlselves Fotected for theirwildlif€ importance. Clearly, waterbirds canimpinge on recreational values; hence thewaterbirds-re.reation issue is a twGwav concem.

T(fi.pliig ol ban16,

lopeller mlion.

deqradation liter@nhmine{onlhmugh siocking and blrd

ol game bkds. leedins,

eicouiaoino loral

sPedes:

llabiral Habilal Habilal Habital

moditicalions ca0 modilicalions ca; modilicalions can modilicaiions can

be adveBe or be adveis€ or be adverse ol be adve6e or

benelicial. bsdeiicial, benelicial. benelicial.)enelicial. .r 'bsdeiicial, .. benelicial. benelicial.

2.0 WETLANDS FOR WATERBIRDS

2.1 lntroductlon

Wetlands provide the food, shelter and restingplaces for a dch assemblage of wate$tuds. Theyalso provide the habitat networks that allowwaterbirds to make some of the most spectacularmigratory joumeys of any antuIals in the world. Intime to b,reed, millions oI swars, ducks, geesqwaders and oiher bfuds undertake annual lourneys ftom more southerly winte ng areas to at-rive each spring on the vast Arctic wedands ofNofih AJnelica and Eulasia. Here they take ad-vantage of the extreme productivity o{ wetlands,successfuly b,reed during the brie{ summer, be-{ore migrating once more to over-winter on irilandand coastal wetlands nany lhousands of kilome-tles to the soudr Some oI these arctic-breederstravel as Iar south as Aushalia, South Africa .mdSouft Amedca to winter, making use oI a wholenetwork oI wetlands as vital retuelling stops onthe way. Clearl, such migrations depend on theintegrity of wetland network. Too Iew could speldisaster for the millions of birds that depend upon

Whilst many waterbirds make long migrations tobreed, others remain to breed in areas closer towint€ring sites, thus resulting in shorter migra-tions. Birds returrring from over-wintering siteselsewhere, usually to the south, may auSmentthese. The wetlands of individual countries maytherefore suppoft a whole Iange oI waterbilds 6omdifferent populations and at various times o{ theyear, {or b(eeding, moulting and wintering pur-po<es. lheir .on"en dtion dnd managemen( is amultinational responsibility, with €ach counftyplaying its part in supporting this shared resoufce.

In thi. .ha pter we prL,vide in5ith t in lo the wa) s inwhich waterbirds use and are dep€ndent onwetland habitats. Data {rcm Britain are used toillustrate the nulnbels and ranS€ o{ species andpopulations involved arld the general pattems ofv/edand usage. Readers requiring tuither informa

-.,:

tion on waterbirds in Britain should consulL Iorexampl€, Pmter (1981), Evans ?f al. (1984), Owe.n eial. (1986), Davidson et l]1. (1991) and amual rc-ports from thewetland B d Survey (e.& Craffwicket al. 7997,1999). Fot intemational accounts see,for example, Bau et al. (1992), Baldassare & Bolen(1994), and rcports from the international water-fowl census (e.9. Doclman et al.'1997 tt seq.,Lopez& Mundkur 1992 Scott & Rose 1995, Rose & Scotr1997).

Our aim is to €mphasise the tIue importance oIB tish waterbirds and their intimacy withwetlands. Howewer there are consequences {or therecreation managef, in sharing sites used {or sportwith the birds. We thereforc highlight the mostimportant of the constraints: impacts of watefitudson water quality and healtfr predation on fishstocks, habitat degadation and constraints asso-ciated with the protected status o{ species or sites.We conclude with some considerations forwetland manageb in helping to saJeguard ourimportant waterbird rcsource.

2.2 Place. to ire.d

For br€edin& as in winter (see below), pattems ofglobal distdbution differ markedly between spe-cies. Some are distributed acrcss seveml continents(r-9. mallard, pintail or dur in) whilst othe$ arefound only ifl one or {ew localities (e.9. Svalbardbamacle goose, black-tailed godwit). This meansthat particular countuies will support a miature o{relatively corrunon waterbirds and also species orpopulations that are either internationally rela-tively scarce, on the edge o{ their mnge or areunique. It also means tllat particular regions orsites within countries will have strong intemational importance Ior certain species.

lu't a fra(ion of thc wdlerbird .peci.* wmLerin8in Bdtain remains to breed there. The rcst journeyto the Ar( ti(. for Brilain.lhe mosicomtrehpnlr\ e

inJomration on brceding distdbutions, popdation

WETIANDS FOR WA|ERB/PDS

sizes and trcnds comcs from national breedingbnd atlases (Sharrock 1976i Clbbons et nl. 1993),

whilst changes since the 19th century are the fo-cus of abook by Holloway (1996). B tishinfoma-tion can be placed in a European context by refer-ence to Hagemeijer & Bla ir (1994. Other heedinssurveys in E tain have focmsed on paticularhabitats or species (r.9. Smith 1983, AIIport e, ll1.

1986, kater 1989, Delany et nI.1992).

fhere s r *ualth of inlonnalion From Bnldin on

breeding watcrbird poplr lations, not all counties

may be so fortunate. Regular breeding populationsin Bdtain includc 2,1wildiowl species,16 waders,I I gxll and t, m -pccie. (r\.luding l^ holly mdrinespecies such as kitiwake) and at least 27 otherwetland specialists (Box 2.1). Based on recentcstimates, owerall almost 2 million pairs o{waterbirds brced in Bdtain, of which about halJ(almost 950,000 pairs) arc waterfowl. With imma-iure and non-heeding birds present Lluring theheeding seaso& the summer total may reach +5million waterbirds, perhaps about half or th€ num-bers present in winter (see below).

l0

Box 2.1 : Blitish hleeding witerbirds , Mhofi;n 240i000 te ioies

. .. . . .1. Ooot 4S,00q

SourcerStone,srar{1997)in.vrhichdeLil.sareslimalidn.'CFni,. 3pairsnehoos ar€ prov'ded Updarad il some 6s€s lrcm WWI/ Oy5lercarcher 3J,OOO-4J.000 par'srweBsdalhr: ,t , r.r ': ..: , .. Avdc€i 400-192 pairsi,, rl ,i rr:.r',. ir ' hUr. Rmsqd ptover 825-r,070 pairs

sp€qinhqtulaliar i. , ,lrriulrtio,f .BrrP l.i. '. 'Rlnserl PlowtIr IIr. s,5bo pai6(m.a3ur.) Go'd61 ProLs, 12.000 orrsRed{hoaiad Divbr 935-1,500 psir6 Laprvhg 190.000-240,000 pairc

B'ackllbaled Dv$ 15',.'89 pa.6 TeFa.icis S'iot I.3 pa 5

Unb crebe .' , 5,00tr1!,000'pam Pu@les dpDe, 1?:1ls.Cear cresleo G€be 8,000 ind'viddal. DJlji4 9.150-9,900 prire

Red-necked Gr{,be 2 Dai$ Ruff tso-24 females

Slavon.an Greb€ 7G78 paits SnrDe .5.000 o3ns

Teal 1.500?.600 p.ir. Rosl6 ln 6a orts.[i{a[ai! i ., 100:1i0.000 Dans . collll0!0 Teh ] 12,300 pairs

'Phtail , l ' 8:ai,paiis. r' Arcirc Tern 44,000 parrs.

Ga.gai., 15.125 paiB Lrlde 164 2,400 pa.6

Saoveler 1.000 1.600 pan5 Kinglirq$ 3 300-5500 pai(Saovele, 1.000 1.600 pan5 Kinsfirq$ 3 300-;500 pai(

tB 9fqit6.d P.p.qh.q'4, i.t..i r 10!.inuiliduals..:..1 iYpllolv)yiolar . , 50,000,ts[ito esPocl'ard 251.406 @rs Glgy tt/agla I 34000 €nsTLlr€d Duct 7.000-8.OO() pdus Diooe. 7,000r' OO0 Dans

bdh,,pi l.'..,i"li \i r't,l0i3briidrr.'.,1'' l " . '.rc;!ii,!warbt6i,.," ' '. )z,at p"imEde, 31,00!-32.000 ielnalot I t ,sariliwaibf&, '' ' .1"i5,r6j". ', I

Cm{qn.qcotQl. ... ,.. 76r89.parrc ,.. l' .. Aqliric Wriue. '..r,' .40 individrals l

Goloen€yi 8r log pai,5 S€oge ltralbler 25OO0O le,nloerl.l 0&1.0lpliri l iil, . l ).. ..Eedse walblq' 250;000 terilone!2,200 p4u MaGh WaroGr li l4 Dars6,000 pa{s Reed Wadrer 4O,OOO-80 000 pa to/0 pairb Bearued Redlnq 339-408 panc

15?-160 '4dlvidLals Reed BL4tirg 220 000 rer:ro es

iliiSrli rl. .' .l . -rr ' ir r r i, ,,

900 pal6 ' na["e Hebndear ooplJ€rionpa{s , huoduLed Ina,nlv E.qlano 3od W8'"sl

als . Hering Gull .. ' . ,. 160,000 pairc r.:,. GEat Flalk-backeq qu ,.., 19.O00.palrs . . ,

l,tti.,. t.,rr:t,.lerqliellqt,.' . .t .1l,9oq*i"" .

WE ANDS FOR WATERB/ROS

British breeding waterbird assemblages arc char-acterised in Figure 2.1. 'fhe cofunonest waterbtudsare sedge warbler, moorhen, lapwing, herring guand black-headed Bull, which together make upover 50% of the total brceding populatior Amongstwaterfowl, moorhm and lapwing are by far themosl abundanl breeding specie< toSe$er benSover 47% oI the total assemblage, with mallaid and

important to consult UK Biodiversity Action planlistings (HI\{SO 1995) and genelat relerence booksand paperc conceming rhe status of br€€ding species (e.& Batten .f d/. 1990, Gibbons er al. 1993,Gregory el al. 2002).

In Britain, and elsewhere, wetland habitats v yin the range and abundance of waterbtuds they

60 oher species (12 8% sedge warbler (12.8%)

coot also abundant. Aside ftom lapwings, the mo6tabundant waderc are oystercatcher, curlew andredshank, each with populations o{ around 30-4O000 breeding pairs. However, none o{ thesewaterbird populations are particularly commonby comparison with more widespread and cos-mopolitanB tish b(eeding birds: therc are an esti-mated 250,000 territodes oI sedge wa$ler, the com-monest waterbird, but 7.1 million teritodes o{wrelr ih€ commonest British brceding bird (Gib-bons ef al. 1993).

Many of the waterbirds that breed in Britain havea widespread distribution in Europe, and lor thesea relatively small proportion of their internationalpopulation is present (Fisure 2.2). Somepopulations, although numericaly small howev{,are very important, notjust in their contribution tooveral biodiversity, but because Britain supportsa signi{icant part of their intemational breedingpopulations (Box 2.2). Odlel wateftirds have verysmall and r,'ulnerable populations and are at theedge oI their natuIal mnge in Bdtain (Box 2.3). Thecontinued presenc€ o{ these populations is impor-tant in maintaining the range and variabitiry ofthese species- Recreation managers in Bitain canuse the inJomation presented here (Box 2.1, 2.2and 2.3) to detemine the de8ree of importance at-tached to particular breeding species. lt is also

lessr black'ba.ked eull(! 3o.4) hemns gu (e 3%)

t'l

black-headed surl (7 6"/d)

Figue 2.i The prcponion oi Ure lohtof Briains bEeding birds which are made up of diffeenr species.

British breeding waterbird assemblage

WETUNDS FOR WATERR/RDS

1a

support, and all wetland habitats support some

-pc.n* L\ en lhe Ln.hore mrrine Tone olBriLain nused by breeding waterbirds (Box 2.4), for exam-ple by adult divers for {eeding dunng their breed-

ing scason. However, o{ the 74 regularly occur-

ring brceding waterbtds in Bitain the greatest

diversily occurs around open stillwatLys - ponds,

lakes, rcservoirs and gravel pits - which provideconcealment for nests and abundant lood foradldts and young. Stillwaters support over halfthe breedint waterbird species allrd are a parhcll-larly important breeding habitat for ducks, gccse,

swans and other wildfowl (26 out of 30 Bntish-heeding species). ArtiJicial waterbodies (reser-

voirs and gravel pits) support important pans oIsome breeding populations, c.8. about 40% of thenational totals of great-crested grebe, tufted duckand coot. Reedbeds and otl1er swamp and fen

habitats also supporl a diverse breedingassemblage, notably of passeines suc'h as warbleEand some species such as bearded reedling andbitterL which are wholly dependent on large

Wet grasslands and peatlands are of particularimportance for waderc, each suppoiting over halfthe British bveeding species. The machairgrd-.l.rnd- of lh,.Ouler Hebrides. Jnd lhc grdzingmarshes o{ the ()1lse and Nene Washes, Some$etl,evels, Norfolk Broads a]Id the Greater Thames

estuary are particularly significant Ior their largenumb€Is and high deDsines of breeding waders.Saltmarshes also provide good breeding areas forwade6, notably redshank, and breeding densitieshere are generally higher than on adjac€nt

$asslands (Davidson ?f al. 1991). Estuades over-all are important b(eedin8 areas, bo$ for their rela-

tively undisturbed nesting opportunities on tleirsaltrna$hes and for the food available on tidal {latsand in sheltered shallow waters. Estuanes, how-ever, do support a much lower diveEity of breed-mg thdn of u intpringwarerbird.. ni- pmphn.i.P.

that waterbirds are much more widely dispersedacross the spectrum of wetland habitats whL'n

breeding tnan in winter (see below), the time whenestuaries and coasts suppot pafiicularly hiShnurnbers and divemitv.

o5s"^cto

o

Ez,

<5 5-24 5-24 2549 50-74 75-99% of international population

Fique 2.2. The number of popu atjons of breed ng walebnds in Bdla n wh ch represenl dlfferent prcponions of $en nbmaiional popu ations

WETLANAS FOR WATERB/RDS

wetlands f or waterbirds

l3

Breeding waterbirds usuafly use severa] habitattypes whilst breeding. Many species nest in onehabitat and Ieed whilst oIf-duty in another, or takethe young alter hatchinS to Ieed in markedly dif-ferent areas. There are many examples: redthroated divers nesting on the edge oI small,Ircshwaters but flyin8 to feed ifl coastal waters orat larger lakes, goldeneye nesting in holes in teesand taking their ducklings to feed in vers, andsheldmks nesting in holes in field-banks and sanddunes but raising their young in tidal flats, la-goons and coastal bays. Reffeationmanage$ willIind it useful to l(I1ow ia{rcn particdar species areheeding (e.8. Box 2.5) as well as the particularhabitdls u"ed lo pn.ure minimdl disturbanLe.

In summary, there are important breedingpopulations of waterbirds dependert on tlle wholespectrum of British wetlands, and perhaps evenmore than in winter waterbirds are dispersedanoss the wealth o{ large and small wetlands$rouShout the colrntry. Although there js often a

focus of attention on the rarer wetland breedingbirds and their habitats, many of the commonerspecies depend ofl the network oI these wetlands

of different sizes for the maintenance oI their brced-ing populations. Iuithermore, even within theirclaily cycles, breeding waterbirds use a vai€ty o{wetland habitat t)?es and locations, and an un-deEtandint o{thehbreedint season requ emenlsis a]l impotant part of their management.

2.3 Placa! to moult

After breeding, many waterbirds undergo a com-plete moult - drc rcplacement of $e Ieathers as theybecome wom and perform suboptimally in teIrffoI insulation and flight. Ihe pattern and timing ofA ma e Mailard in mou t, n a lrans I on from ts Emiliar breeding ptumage

lo ls summer moul piumaqe (ec pse).

moult vadcs amongst species and locations. Themain moult of wildfowl and wade$ in Europetakes place in late srllnmer and early autumn, wh€'nbodl body and wing feathe$ are replaced. MostwildIowl moult all their flight feathers simultaneously, becoming flightless in late surnrner usuallyon or neaf their breeding gounds be{ore migrat-ing to wintering grounds. They may be flightlessfor a pedod of between 3-5 weeks (Salomonsen1968). However, since individuals within a popu-lation may moult at different times, the period inwhich some birds may be flightless carl be muchlong€r, {or example, May to October for Mute Swaisin the UK (Coleman rt dl. 2002).

For some wildJowl moulting areas for species thatundertake moult migations are quite well docu-

wate.bi

. Sheducks irom Brlaii journey lo the fetgoand Bight lGernan Wadden Sea) wilh sma numbers also oi the Fnlh of

Forlh Dee Humber Wash and Severn esluar es (Jones

1989 Bryanl 19/8 1981).

. male goosanders move ro northern Norway (L ltle &

. sone leE Canada geese lourney to nonhern Scolland lomoull (reierences in A an el a/. 1995)

. Brilish mute swan populatons undergo dislncl oca! moulmigralions loo eman et a] 2AA2, Sora\ et al. 2AA2).

Ior other wildfowl, infomation is severely lackin8, though late summer surveys have been un-detaken to attempt to locate key moulting sites(Salrnon 1988i Cranswick 1995). Further work isnecessary in B tain, and no doubt in many otherplaces, to provide a greater und€rstandin8 of moult

rds in Britain14

(19S3).

WETLANDS FOR WATERB/RDS

l3

Breeding waterbirds usually use several habitattypes whilst breediflg. Many species nest in onehabitat and feed whtut ofI-duty in another, or taketheir young aJter hatcling to Ieed in markedly dif-ferent areas. There are many examples: red-throated divers nesting on the edge oI small,freshwaters but flying to feed in coastal waters orat larger lakes, goldeneye nesting in holes in t€esand taking their ducklings to feed in vers, andshelducks nesting in holes in field-banks and sarlddunes h1t raising their young in tidal flats, Ia-

Soons and coastal bays. Recreation managers willfind it usefu I to know lafien particular species arebreeding (e.9. Box 2.5) as well as the parricularhabilat\ used to eriure r runu|di5hrrbancc

In summary, there are important breedingpopulations of waterbirds depmdent on the wholesp€.trum of Bdtish wetlands, and perhaps evenmore than in winter waterbirds are dispersedacross the wealth oI large aIld small wetlandsthrcughout the counfy. Although there is often afocus of att€ntion on the rarer wedand breedingbirds arld their habitats, many of the commonerspecies depend on the network of these wetlands

of diffemt sizes lor tlle maintmance oI iheir brced-ing populations. Fmthermore, even within theirdaily cycles, breeding waterbirds use a variety ofwetland habitat types and locations, and an un-derstanding o{ dreir b(eedinS season rcqdrementsis an important part oI then management.

2.3 Ptace6 to moutt

AJter breeding, many waterbirds undergo a com-pletemoult ihe rcplacemmt of the Ieathers as theybecome worn and pe#om sub-optimally in temsoI insulation and flight. The pattem and dming ofA male Ma ad n mout, in a lBnsilion nom ib familiar breeding plumage

io its smm moult pumase (ecrips).

moult varies amongst species and locations. The

main moult o{ wildfowl and wadeE in Europe

takes place in late surnmer and early autulra whenboth body and wint feathers are replaced. Mostwildfowl moult a[ fteir flight featheE simultane-ously, becoming flighdess in late summer, usuallyon or near their breeding grounds b€{ore miSrat-ing to wintering gounds. They nay be fliShtless

for a period of between 3.5 weeks (Salomonsen

:1968). However, since individuals within a PoPu-lation may moult at different times, the pedod inwhich some birds may be flightless can be mtchlonger, for example, May to October Ior Mute Swans

in the UK (Colernan .f 47. 2002).

For some wildfowl, moulting areas for species thatundertake moult miSrations arc quite well docu-

. ShelducG from Brila n louney lo the Heisoland Bisht (Ger

man Wadden Sea) wilh small numbe.s aso on (he F dh oi

Fo h, Dse, Humber Wash and Sevem eslua.es (Jones

1989, Bryant 1S78, 1981).

. ma e goosanders move io norlhern Notuay (L tl e &

. some lera Caiada Seese loumey to norlhern Scolland lo

moult tereences in A hn el a/ 1995)

. Brush mute swan popu ations underqo d siinci loca moull

r 96r ons (coreman et at. 2002, Sptay et at 2a02).

For other wild{owl, infomation G severely la&-in& thou8h late summer sufleys have been un-dertaken to attempt to leate key moulting sites(Salmon 1988j CraNwick 1995). Futher work is

necessary in Bdtain, and no doubt in many oiherplaces, to provide a Sreatenmderstanding of moult

t4

WETLANDS FOR ]4A.ERR|RO'

ecology and to quantify the r€lative importance ofindividual wetlands as moulting sites.

As Bell J\ mlcr- and inrrd.pe( rc vdriarion inpatterns o{ moult, fuIthel complexity ads€s blrcauseoI geographical variations and differmces in thetiming ofmoult in rclation to migratory movements.Many wildfowl moult on or dose to their brcedinSgroundc.rlthouSh somc undergo d moult miSra-tion, travelling many hundreds of miles(Salomonsen 1968, Ogilvie 1975). More south€rlywinterinS wader popu lations begin their moult atsLd8m8 sile\ dnd ihm \u.pend it whilst they mi-grale furlhcr,l:ompletjng moult on Lheil wintcring

Srounds. Moult is morc rapid in northerly winterin8 populations lhdn tor tho.p winlerints inwarmer/ more southerly areas.

'Ihe moult pedod oI ducks is particularly stress-tuI, not just because moult is en€rgetically costly

(Masrnan ei fl/. 1986), but also because there is anincreased dsk of predation and increased susceptibility to disturbance because ihe birds are flight-less. Recreation managers need to be sensitive totle needs ol moultm8 buds i nd md) tind t}le in-fomation presented on thc timing of moult to beusetul (Box2.6).

It is well kno*.n that many waterbirds s€ek thesafety of particular wetland sites during p€dodsof moult. Ofter thesc are traditional, long estab-lished sites and some wetlands are very important in this resped. Unfortunatel, however, thereis genenlly little information for species other thanwild{owl on which wedands are used Ior moult-ing purposes and why these sites are selected.InBritah for example, it is known that moultingwadeG concentate on a few large estuaries, withmajor and diverce moutting wader concentrationsin the Wash, More€ambe Bay, Dee and Ribble

t5

WETLANDS FOP WATERA|ROS

t5

esiuaries, and much smaller numbem in manyplaces elsewhere (Da\.idson e, dl. 19E6).

2.4 Pl.(es to winter

Wetl,rn.is suppot dle geatcst concentrations ofwaterbirds inwinter, providnlg plentifulfeedingoppotunities as well as safe places to rest ardsleep. Mosi \^,interinS waterbirds fced al1d roost

in flo.\- -urnel'Tr. rrLlJr.berLnt ll,uu.Jnd. Eairing advantages such as an improved awareness

of predators irnd shclier that reduces ihc'nnoregu-latorycosts. Roosts arc uscd \ .hen digesiion takes

prccedence o\.er feeding or when food is Unavail-

able or not prolitable to gaihe' when .overed bythc tide at coastal sites pcrhaps, when it is too dark

\fJr\i,J.ll"pder:)orsh,rtl c ri'\ of prFd.rtiJ, .ioo high. The besi roost sitcs are probably those

wlrcre encrgy loss is minilnised: those close to feed-

ing areas, whcre there is shelter and where distur-bances are fcw. Adequate {eecling, roosting andloafing areas are ess.'nlial components of winter-ing waterbird habitat. Providing sites rclalivelyfree ftom dislurbance is an important elcment ofthe managem€'nt of waterbird habitat networkq

As for breeding birds, thc global distributions oIwini€ying waterbirds vary Seatly amongst spc'cies. They can be expaffive or very restricte.L whilstthe numbers anLl species diversity at Particularsites v,rries with wetlan.t t_ype, location and the

quality of the habitai available. Bitain is fothrnat. to host substaniial waterbi-r.t populations(Olvcn ct dl. 1986, Daviclson rt nl. 1991), drawn

from breeding locations over a vast area oI thenorthem hemisphere (Figure 2.3) as well as trornwithh Bdtain itsel f. Rcgulal counts show that ovcr85 populations of wai!'rbirds useBdtishwetlandsin appreciable numbers winter. These include38 wildfowl populations (including the non na-

tive Canada goose); 22 wader species; {ir.e gullspecies, and the grey ircron (Box 2.7). In total, morcthan :I0 million .aterbirds arc present in winic'r,with black-headed 9u11, lap(dng, reed blu1fiB and

moorhL'n together .ontributinia just over hnlJ ot iheiotal (Figurc 2.4). Over 5.5 milljon $,ildfowl and

*,aders are inclucled (2.1millionwi1dfoil'l and 3.4

mrlliuntrdd,i.-Dul ror".hd. l\eldHur figurr Ln

cludes the 1.5-2 million lap\ .ings a]ld golclcn plov-ers that predominantly use non-wetlard farm-ld-ol.Ttu-"--e-nb'.,S,,-d^mirrredb) 1.rph'nts

mallard, dunlln, knot, wigeon and oystercatcher,\^ rlh I4 'ppcip. e"( h h-\ r1B Brir .h wrrleringpopulations exceedint 100,000 birds, the largest

Lleing lapwing (>1.5 rnillion) and mallard(500,000). Although these may seem largepopulaiions, ihc $eat maioritv ofwaterbir.ts arernarkcdlt, s.arce in compaison to other Britishbirds, e.s. u.ren (7.1 million), chaffnlch (s.4 mil-lion) and blackbird (a.a million) (cibbons dr dl.

1993). The relaiively small population sizes forwaterbirds make them vulncrable to the loss and

degradation of the wetlands on whi.h theydc?cncl.

OI cou6e relaiivcly few waterbird spc.ies winreronly in one counxy. Britairy like othl.'r countries,contributes to the maintenance of global

t gure 2 3 B€edlng range and m gralon rcules ol wadec and w diouLlhal use Brla n (f@m Davdson er ai 1991)

WETLANDS FOR WATERB|RD9

Figu€ 24. The pmpodion oi the lola of Brhin's wlntedng waieblds in

populalions, with substantial proportions of many.p.l:ic<: o\ er 25'4 of the lolal winler potulahon-oF 30 migatory waterbirds, and for nine oI theseover 75% (Iigure 2.5). Ihese nine are all wildfowland wader populations: drc pi*-footed goose, lce.landic arld North Scottish greylag geese, Green-Iand and Svalbard bamacle geese, goosander,redshank, tumstone and knot (Box 2.4. In severcwinlerc Br[i.h h clland, rHJin p! en Brealer 518-

nificance as more birds auive to lind reluge (see

below).

Wintering waterbird assemblage

black-headed gull (18.6%)

lapwins (14.0%)

buntins (9.3%)

moorhen (9 3%)

Briain which are made up oi difiercnt speces

Waterbirds often usc a great variety of wetlandhabitats in winte' here illustated for Bdtain (Box2.8). V\4'rl.r dr lea,t one spe, res u.e. all mainwetland types, coastal wetlands, and paticularlyestuaries, are of great importance and are used by75% of all wintering populations and 86% oIwader populations. Of the 5.5 million wate owlwinterinS in Bdtain, estuaries support over 30%

o{ bhds. Open stillwateE also support a diversewinterin8 assemblage, especialy oI wild fowl (58 %

o{ th€ total), as do Srasslands such as coastal

66 other species (10.7%)

seylaq soo* (leland) (0.9%snipe(o.9%)

dark-belli€d b€ntgoo* (1 09q)

pink-iooted goose (1 3%)

heriing gull(2 6%)

wgeon (2 6on)

knol12 7%)

t7

E '10

z

Figurc 2.5 Th6 numbs of popu alions oI winledng waled ds n B lain whlch Epeenl dlffeenl prcpodions of the r international popu alions

Wetlands for waterbirds

% of internaiional populalion

WE ANDS FOR WATERR/RO'

B

D

?

B

B

B

.9c;

D

% ln Briltin

cc

D.E

120,000

32,00012,000

B

cB

cc

Ia

.B

B

c

ta

WETLANDS FOR WATERB/RDs

l9

WETLANDS FOP WATERAIROS

20

grazhg marshes and other wet grasslands (33%

of th€ iotal).

I he pre-en( e of d \ prv drver-e bird d'n mhlrgc inmany wetlands is also importani, with particu-lJ,l) rh. ldrSpr\ er ldnd- -Lrfpod m8 mdn\ diJfcr

ent species of national and internaiional importance (for guidance on winter site assessment see

Box 2.9). In total some 118 tsdtish wetlands support at least one intemahonally important winterLrg pofuldri.n: ab.Lrl half ot rhe-e drF e-ludrmeand coastal, with many of the othe$ bein8 lakesand reseroirs that ac! as roosiing areas for geese.

In addition at least 51 wetlands,40 of them estua-

rine or coastal re8u1arly support an assemblagen1 eacess oI20,000 winierint water{owl, makingthese places intemationally imporiant for dds reason alone- Brt for the scarcer species the popula-tion size for in temanona I importance is sma ll (r.9.

whooper swar 160, Bewick's swan 170, Svalbardbamacle goose 120; Svalbard light-bellied brentgoose 50) so that even some rclatively smalltr (.lland- d-re of mler.ldhonJ, rmportdnLc. I ,,r rn-

Iomaflon on the relative importance o{ particu lar

sites in Bdtain see the annual repofls from theWetland Bird Surve], (.,8. Cranswick ef dl. 1997,

WETLANOS FAR WATEPBlRDS

1999, Pollitt el i71. 2000, MusSrove e, dl. 2001, Po11iu

ct nl. 2003). For intenational dist butioN of ke),sites see Scott & Rose (1996).

It is impoltani to understand that there is considerable variabiliiy in the distribution pattems ofparticular species. Some species are concentraiedinio just a Iew wetland sites (c.8. Svalbard banacle goose, bean goose, knot, bart:Liled and blacktailed godwit in Britain), whilst manlr, especiallythe commoner waders and ducks, a re widely dispersed throughout the wetland resource. Thismeans that parts of some populations are dis-persed around many smau!'r wetlands that indi-vidually lrc1d small tumbers (Davidson dr nl. 1991).

It is clcar, drreforc', that waterbird s use a networkof small wetlands, arld, together wilh the largerores, &ese form a vital component of the winiering ranSe of the many Ilyway populations (a

fl],way population is a rather discrete group ofbrd".epdrrled trom olhFr. b\ lnerrd ferent n.gration rortes). Thus sympathetic manaSeme.nt ofsmall as well as larBe wetlands is importa]lt forthe safeguard of these populations.

\ hil.lh.1l!rbird,ma] bc quilc.cdrnrary J.rm8thc treedhg and moult periods, at oihcr hmesmany waterfowl are hishly mobile, using a wholcsuite o{ wetlands. The exact usate of wedand habitat by waterbirds often vades between sites, lromdqr to day and from year to )€ar. Factors a{ectinS1lse include the locaLion of $e most pro{itable foodsupplics; the distribution of competitors and.onspecifics, levels of distlrbance, both natural(e.8. predato$) and nar-madL', daily energy re-quirements; and weathcy conditrons, especiallytemperature, wind speed and direction.

Within fie daily cycle, waterbirds somctimes fl]rconsiderable distances ftom their feeding grcundsto iind suitable roosting sites and rcium. Wadersand otherc may taverse large estuaries, joumey

long distanc€s along one shoretine, and even skipto difierent estuaries (see e-8- Fumess 1973,Symonds ef al. 1984, Davidson & Evans 1985,Mitchel et al. 198& Kirby er /,1. 1993). Wi]dJowl,such as swans and gees€/ generally Iorage close totheir roost sites, mostly within 5-10km (2.& Owenef a/. 1986, Giroux & Patterson 1995, Keller ct al.lqq8). bul lonSor di,rancc fli8hlc dre ".metime-necessary. Within this flexibility of use there arealso interspecific dillerences in the consistency ofbirds' distribution (see Pienkowski & Pienkowski1983,Ior dul in in Westem Europe).

Common to many o{ these movements is the needfor birds to exploit a profitable food supply to meettheir daily energy needs, and to Iind saf€ and un-disturbed localities in which to rest and sleep.Sometimes it is impoltant to store energy also, fotu\p durinS migrarion or durint emerEenc) periods, ?.& in severe weather (see below). In thesecase6, fr€edom ftom disturbance may become para-mount. A clear understanding of the requircmeftsof each species and of the use of wetland habitatnetworks in wintff should enable manaSers tominimise recreational effects and impacts at thekey times o{ year and safeguard an area'swaterbird populations.

2.5 l{etwork5 lor mlgr.tion

Many waterbirds are migatory and a key conser-vation {€ature of these is the use o{ a network ofsites Iorjoumeys between bre€din& moulting andwintering areas. Each wate6ird species or popuIation (and eren d Jerenl mdividual. hitldn d

population) lus its own particular mi$ation stlat-e$ and habrldl prelerences and .o migrdtes m d

different way arld uses a differeni suite of sftesLluring it. rugrarion. Ihi- lcdd. tu mdn) miErd-tion systems that overlap in time and space. Thes€can be grouped, for convenience, into broa.l'fl].ways' used by ma]ly populations during thei{arulual migrations (Wader Study Group 1992).Britain, for €xample, sits at mic{ latitudes and atthe westem side of the East Atlantic ll},.way, theroute used by many African,Eurasian wat€rbirds-Bdtish wetlands th€refore play host to migratingwaterbirds in spring and autunm, birds o{ten stay-ing only for rclatively short periods (especiallywadcls) but, nevertheless, taking on energy andrcsting in oider to complete their mi8rations. Maintaining dds fl},.way, and indeed the va ety andquality oI watedowl site networks throughout theworld, is a cornerstone of waterbird conseNationand management.

Most miSratory waterbirds are unabte to fly non-sLop belwcen their brpcding Jno \^ rnlFrinBgrounds because the disiance is too {ar. Some spe-cies make a large number of small'hops' - a srrai-egy depmdcnt on the availability oI suitable feed-ing in many places and one in which birds needstore only small reserves oI fat as migratory fuel(Piersma 198%). Odus, such as the brcnt 8oose,fly long distances (perhaps >3000km) betweenvery few staging areas and store very largeamounts of fat and muscle protein- Others occurat more numerous staging locations but each indi-vidual uses only a few. This complell mixture ofmi$atory strategies is poorly understood andunderlines the need for a precautionary approachto site prctection. When in doubt on the actual importance oI a staging post for a given species - lookafter it.

21

WE|LAn/DS FOR ltl/A|EPB/RDS

22

A few waterbtud species or y regularly occur orJyon British wetlands during their spring and autunn mi$arions. for evmple.urlcw \andprperalld spotted redshank. For others, populations dif-{ercnt to those preseni in summer or winter occuron passage. In dunlio for example, sPdng andautumn populations on estuaries can includebirds from the rall Bitish-brcedint sc,tirzii poptl-latiory a larger s.turzii population from Icelandicbrceding gounds, a small Greenland-heedingd/.ricn population, and the dlp;ra wintering popu-larion from Siandiflavia and Russia. which ac-

counl- for the grcalcrpropnrrion olour winterin8bird-. Ihese arc diffr'rcnt brccdinB populdtjons.distin8uishable by plumage and size.

Relatively few wildlowl use British wetlands or yas mi$atory stopoveE, since most travel no fur-ther south or southwest than Britain and Irelandto over winter. In autumn many stop for a timeouh,ide.,f Brildin belore mo\T8 here in earl\ Bin-ler. In .ome in,lance". howc!er. dutumn \LrginB

sites in Bitain are of major importance. For exam_

ple aLnost the whole of the Greenland barnacle

Boo.e popujation use. I och Cruinan, Ida\. inOctober belore dispersing throughout their kishand westem qoth5h s interints range. Tn sprinS

many B tish wintedng watedowl populationsmove to stopover sites north and east of Bdtain,nolabl) thp WadLlen >ea. h dder popr.rlJlions tr Ln'

tering {uriher sou th on the Atlantic coasts do, however/ occu r in large numbers in sprinS and autunnon B tish wetlands, particularly estuaries. Totalpeak spdng estuarine populatio$ are sma]ler thanthose in winter, but allowing lor population turnGver, between 750000 and 1,500,000 waders PIob-ably use British estuaries in sp ng, representingin excess of 20% of the fl),way population.

ln sprinS, populatlons of most wade6 tend to be

concentEted on fewer estuaries tllan in winter.The birds also terd to be concenhat€d on the larger

estuaries and coastal bays, notably the Wash andHllmber estuary in eastem Bnhin, and the large

estuaries o{ the noltheln Idsh Sea coast of north-west Britain (from the Dee estuar.r/ to the SotwayFirth) (Prater 1981; Da\.idson e, dl. 1991). Ovemll,th€ west coast of Britain is of particular impor-tance Ior waders that breed in lceland, Greerlland

and Canada and winter as far south as West

In summary, wetlands are yital in tlat they pro-vidc thc net\ork of sile" lhaL make "uch

miSrd-

tions possible. G1rcial for such places to scn e suc-

WF ANI)S FOR WA|EPE/RDS

cesstully as stopovers on migration is a suitable,abundant and available {ood supply so that birdscan rfiel Ior onward migation, and securib, fromdisturbance so that they can feed and retuel as

rdprdl) a. rhey need. helland. u.ed r.r.tagingmay be important for reasons other than just theaccumulation o{ fat and muscle protein. For exam-ple, spdng stopover sites may be vita) sources o{resources scarce on the brceding grounds: femaleknol. have re.ently been tound lo "ton cdlcium in

their bones at Iate spdng staging areas (Piersma ctdl- 1996). Sufficient calcium is essential for egg-shell fomation 6nd lack of calcium is known togreatly rcduce breeding success in birds.

2.6 Sate havenB

Of all of the emergency situations faced bywaterbirds (e.8. pollution eve'nts, disease out-breaks), severe winter weath!'r most fr€quendyposes problems, at least at northerly latitudes.Wdlerbird\ Benerally lrve m e\p.red condihon"and severe weather geatly intreases the mergeticcosts of thermoregulation. lndeed, it is during pe.dods of low temperatures and high winds (and

especially when the combination of ihe two produces a high wind-chill factor) OIat btuds must either draw on energy stores deposited in advanceoI such conditions or find more food. Howevet atthese times food is usualy eiiher less available ori\ complelely inaccecsrble because of change- in

prcybehaviom or{reezinS or snow cover onfeed-ing grounds. At these times watedowl either stay

where they are and draw on fat alld protein stores

to balance their daily n€eds, or move to find milderIeeding conditions. Under severe weather condi-tions waterbirds may depend either on sites notnoma]ly in their network, redistdbtte themselves

acrcss network sites/ or use the same sites in waysdiflerent ftom nonnal. Dlferent species adopt differert survival strategies under severe conditions;see the detailed reviews of Baillie ct a/. (1986).Ridgill & Fox (19e0), Davidson et 1?1. (1991) andKirby (1995b) {or Bdtain and Eu rope.

S€vere winter weather js an important lactor forthe waterbirds oI Bdtish wetlands. In general,waterbtuds ov€r-wintedng in freshwater and in-land wedands are most mpidly or severcly affected,rin, e these place" are the fir.t lu tree,,e. Fstua riesand other coastal wetlands are less vulnerable tofteezing b€cause of the bufferinS effect of relativelywam sea temperatures combined with tidal wa-ter movements and the lower Ireezing poinr oI saltwater. Hence estuaries take on a major impotanceas re{u8es dudng severe winter weather. Further-more in many severe weather events the condi-tions are less e\lreme m Brilain thdn m contincntal Europe. This, combined wift the larger tidalringes of Brih.h F.tuarie. compdred wit]1 majorcontinental estuades such as the Wadden Sea,makes Bitish estuanies less likely to fr€eze and sowidr added importance intemationally as refuges.

Some oystercatchers, redshanls and du ins areLnown to move to Britain from continental estuar-ies in severe weather. Some gley ploveE recordedat Teesmouth in noth-east England were only re-ported m ) edrs when lhere bassevcreweathcr inthe Wadden Sea (Townshmd 1982). Other spe-( rps may move in too. Kirbv ( lqq5b) pre\mtin8 cvi-dence for influxes oI bar-tailed godwitr ringedplovers, knots and sanderlin8s. Many inland andgrassldnd winterinS t^aders. notdbly lapwing.golden plover, snipe and curlew, move to coastsand, when these are ftozm, ou t of Britain into lre-land, Fmllce and Iberia (e.R. Kirby & Lack 1993,

Kirby 1995b). Evidence odsts Ior regional re-distribution within Bdtain also, involving at least fivespecies (ringed plovers, black-tailed godwits, bar-tailed godwits, curlew and tumstone) (Kirby1995b). However, many waders remain on theirusual wintering Srounds in severe weather, ex-ploiting their fat and Fotein storcs to flrvive. Evenwilh lhis and otherddaplarion...u, h a- minim is-in8 encr$ e\pendirure bv <ee(m8 .heller. ur inexteme cases remaining on rcost sites rather thanfeeding during loh Lidc, mar) wadcr. hure rn-deased mortality at such times (Baillie e, dl. 1986Kirby 1995b). Severc winter weather ofte.n aJ{ectsoystercatcherc and redshanks moie Epidly thanother waders, and mortality of these species is of-ten higher on continental and eastem Bfitish

estuades- Others sulIerin8 severe wearhermortality in Britain include dnged, gotden afldgrey plovers, lapwing, sanderling, durlin andcurlew (Kirby 1995b).

Many wildlowl are also known to move in re-.pon.p lo 5e\ ere wedther cin.e inl.rnd winteringsites are more vulnemble to fteezin& Ridgill & Fox(1990) showed that seven (shelduck, wigeorr teal,pintail, shoveler, tuJted duck and pochard) out ofnine common wildlowl species moved out of northBritain and the Wadden Sea into south and westBritain and north and west Fmnce, with somemoving as far south as Ibeia. The numbets o{ birdsmovin& and where they go, seems to depend onrhe di.rribution and rc\ eriD ot the tr edrher \omegeese also move in respon-r to s€vere weather. Mostpink-footed geese move south from Scotland intothe coastal rcgions of north-west Britain. MoreGver, the propoftion of the small Svalbard Iight-bel-lied brent goose population reaching Lindisfamein north-east England is closely tinked wirh thewinlcr wFalher, ondition, on rl. olher \^ interinggrounds in Denmark (Owen er al. 1984 Ridgill &Fox 1990).

Overall, severe weather events can placewaterbfuds under sever€ stless. Minimising dis-turbance, from rccreation {or example, is €speciallyimportant under these circumstances. In the UK,there has been a voluntary agle€ment in place forsome years to ban shooting and some other dis-tu$ing activities during severe weather in orderto ensure maximum sulvival through thesepenods.

Humans can also have a beneficial eflect onwaterbirds. Ior example, some consetvation or-ganisations provide food {or birds or rnanage habi-tat in such a way that Iood is more abundant, inorder to increase the conseffation value of siies orattract birds close to public viewing sites. The factthat birds flock to such places indicates that rheybenefit from such action, especialy when severcweather nukes other sites unavailable. Prime ex-amples of habitat qeation and management tobenefit both birds and people are fount at the re-seffes of the Wildfowl & Wetlands TrusL wherethe aim of habitat improvemL'nt is not only to ben-efit birds but also to bring them closer to publicviewing areas, where hundreds of thomands ofhuman visitors can see themnear at fland. ln some.asc< bait n provrded lo dttra( I birdc clo.e l. \ iewing facilities. Such reserves no doubt have a beneficial effect on over winter survival. The public at

23

WETLANOS FAR WATEPBIRDS

21

parks or suburban sites also feeds many of thetamer species and no doubt supplementary {eed-ing enhances winter sur\.ival.

2,? Impticatlon8 for wetland msnsgers

It should be clear from previous sections that a

Sreat va ety of waterbirds are dependent onwcdand\ when breedinS, leeding and restin& mmany localities across their summer, winter andmigratory ran8es. The implications {or wetlandmanagers are numerous and must be consideredin d€veloping effective and sustainable manage-ment for waterbirds and their wetland habitats.They include:

. wet ands can suppo rich assemblages of waterbirds, or

lust a lew species lhat may nevertheess be mpo ani.

. many wet ands suppo a m xlure ot birds lhal breed orwiiter n dillerenl counl es, emphasis ng the gtoba nature

oI lhe resource and inlernalional responsibilily for aciion.

. e{en .he conmoleqr (aterbnd., ,1ohei b eedrrS o. 1

lering, are impodani contributors lo biodiversrly and may,

in any case, not be especially numerous n a wider con,

. aoy waterbird community may inc ude spec es that ar€

diehationa y relalvely sca.ce, on lhe edqe of th6 range,

vulnerable or unique.

. small or vu nerable walerbird populations may suffer the

mosl irom fu her changes loss and degradalion ofwetlands

throu9hour rhen ranges

. a I lypes of wetland hab tals may be imponant Jor the

waierb rds lh€y support, and even artficial sites may be

of considerable mportance.

. moullhg bnds, and lhose enduring severe woather evenls,

need exna enercy and are panicu arly v0lnerable to pr€-

dalion and disludance.

. many walerbirds are highly m gralory and use a notwork

of siles lor mov ng Io and iiom breeding, mou ling and

winler ng areas, [,lainlaining the var ely and quality ofwate owl sile nelworks lhrcughout the word is a cornerslone of walerb rd conserualon and managsmenl.

. bird concenlralions may altract inceas€d human use, which

can in ilsetl cause dete oralion ii sal€r qualily (Wh lmore

el a/ r995).

. some indlviduaLs, populalons or speces depend on lust a

few key p aces long distances apart during their annua

migratonsi oihers require a n€lwork of many places at

reldlire v s'1o1 dislar.os aod l (eu r@rar or $r9r9

WE ANDS FOR WATERB/PDS

areas are olten used ior on y sho (days or weeks) peri.

ods of lhe year: so durallon of use oi a weitand is nor the

only 9ood indicalor of ts imporlancs.

. because ol rapid populalion rurnov6rduring migralon, targerproporliois of llyway populatiois us6 slaging areas thaiis apparenl lrom the number present al any one time, so

the si9nilcanc,c ol such sites is readily underestimaled

[rany waterb rds are mobie w rhin seasons reg ons and

sltes and ut I se a who e su ie ot wetlands and habital

. many dfierent scales of nelwork lfiom a few to s€vera

lhousand k onretres) must be safe0uardod

. reiable informalion is needed on the r6lativ6 mporlance ofpadcular speces so lhat ihese can be saloguarded. It s

useful to know n wh ch months parl cular species breed

and tro rl ar d or .1e| req I .er"1 s '!or ".c. rS. .crs 1S

young, whilsl n mou I or lor w ileriig

. an undeBland ng of the year round habilal requnemenls oieach species s an impo anl pa of waterbnd end wetland

management A cear undeBtanding of lho requiremenls oleach spec 6s and of lhe use of wet and habita( networks

shou d enable manageB io minlmise rocrea(ional elfeclsand impacls and safeguad an areah watgrbnd popu alions.

2.8 Are watorbirds a constreint onrccreation?

From the sections above, it is clear that waterbfudsare dosely associated with wetlands and that adiverse, wetland network is essmtial for support-irg diver,e ard aburdant walcrbird populaholl!.However successf ul waterbird conservation neas-ures may result in large and concentated groupsof birds, sharing the wedand resource with rec-reational usels. The latter rnay view the birds as aconstraint on their enjoyment of sport in thewetland envnonment. There may be health andenjoyment difficulties and constaints on the de-velopment of slDting opportunities because of thepresence of protected species or the protected sta-tus o{ wetland sites.

2.8.1 Wdter qualitr an.l publtu health

Reoeational water usels may have concems aboutreductions in water quality attributable towate$irds. The faeces Irom large numbers of roost-ing or leedinB bird,. espec'ally r\ hen flo.ling inwinter, can have apFeciabl€ impacts on aquaticnut ent budgets that could induce €utophicationprocesses on sensitive waters. High densities rnaypolentiall\ ha ve d ne8a ti ve inJ-lu ence o n en \ ironmental qualiq, Ior a wide range of reoeational

water use$, as well as for the birds themselvesand other wildlife.

Scrutiny oi relevant rcsearch studies reveals thatthe quality of su ace waters may be affected bynutrients inbird fa€ces (Box 2.10). Since wateft dsmav roo.t in \cry ldrSe concentrations. and 5m(ethe use oI roost sites is generally sustained overperiod- of monlhs. walerbird\ mav pldy an un-portant role in the determination oI a site's waterqualb. H) perrrophi( Balcr,of(en havcspecie-pom inverteb(ate faunas (conseFation impact), canbe subject to blooms oI toxic blue-green algae(cyanobacteria - animal and human healththreats), llave low dissolved oxygen concenta-tions (potential fish mortalities) and poor waterclarity (reduced aesthetic appeal). Most attentionhas so far {ocused on the impact of mass Sult roostson public water\uppl) reservoirs ard l})ea\.oci-

ated public health concenr-s (e.g. Fennel et r/. 1974,Butte i€ldefdl.1983). cutls oftm forage on rub,bi-h tj p. dnd ldndfillirle5. pi.Ling up d wide \ drietv of baL lend. anLl tluc lher. i, thp dr.fm, tpo..ibility of transfer to reservoirs when the birds re-tuJn to communal roosts. Botulism and Sr/morell4poisoning colrld result.

A related concem cenhes on ihe trarsfer of pathogenic bacteda to Srasslands used for amenity purf.se\ ( irh wdterbird\ the ro, u5 ot c^n.(m inpublic parks containing waterbodies. A rc'cent assessment for Canada geese, which produce largequantities of faeces and are often in close contactwith humans, concluded by finding no conclu-sive evidenc€ for haffmission of pathogens tohunaff in this way (Allan et nl. 1995). Howeverseveral types of potential human patho8ens havebeen isolated tuom Canada goose and otherwate$ird faeces and thus there is all unknow.n,but possibly significant, disease sk to humansfrom contact wiih waterbird faeces.

Bird concentrations in themselves make such wa-ter attractive to the hJormal user as well asbirdwatchers, so the presence of bird concentra-tions could result in increased human use. Rec-rparional u.ers md) lhem.elve\, du5ed deleriora-tion in the quality o{ water and, wher€ treatment{acilities are limited, it is rccommended that access to water bodies supplying potable watershould be restricted (Whitmor€ et al. 1995).

2-8.2 Prc.lation olJ*h stockii

Another concem, specifically for anglers, is aboutthe growing numbers o{ fish-eating birds and thelevels of predation on both natural and stockedfisheries. The bid species involved in Britain arenuir y cormorant, goosander, red brcasted mer-gaj'.er and grev heron (8.\ 2 tl). dnd o,, d.',,4-ally geat crested grebes or kingfishers also. Suchbirds have generally prospered in recent times,resulting in €xpansion of both numbers and dis-tribution. Futhemorc, they are protected in B t-ain and Xrrope although licences can be issued toprevent's€dous damage' to fisheries wherc non-lethal met}tods oI danage limitation have be€n triedbuthave failed (see 4.3.1.3).

Fishing interests have expressed anxiety, andsometimes anger/ aboui the levels of fish-eatingbird Fedation at vadous types oI {ishe{, a]ld inmany different situations (Box 2.12). Key concems{ocus on the combined efiects o{ consurnption and

25

WETLANDs FOP WATERB/RDS

25

Ve6alile hunteE in

16ms o, fomsins

melhods, habilalseJelotod ?nd li€h

attempted capture oI fish (causing fright and darn-d8e lo li-h from beal mdrls,.con5idered lo be im-portant issues for th€ pe ormance o{ a given fish-ery. Th€ subject therefore encompasses the conser-vation of fish-€ating waterbirds and of native fish,and economic considerations pertaining to fisheriL's perforrnance. Economic considemtions tend tobe mo.t relevant to inlennvel) no( [ed licherie-.where stock are exp€nsive but are seemingly easy

fre) dnd lor\ome. hiSh-den.it) . .odr.e ticherie..

The conflict between fish-eating birds and fisheryinterests has stimulated a nlrmber of very detailedassessments of the perceived problens, both in

WE ANOS FOR WATERA/RDS

300-500q per day,

Britain (e.9. Marquiss & Carss 1994; Carss &Marquiss I996; Holmes & Clement 1996; Kirby ef,/. 1996; Russel erdl.l99tHughes eldl.1999) andelsewhere G.8. Nettleship & Duffy 1995, vanEerden e, dl. 1995, Baccetti & Cherubini 1997,Crorrradzki & Gromadzka 1992 van Dam & Asbirk99n.

Three yeals of new research, commissioned byMAFF, DETR and EA in Britain, has re.!'ntly beencompleted to investigate the full range of problems,policy implications and possible managemen! s(}lutions, for hercns, cormomnts and goosanders(Hugheseral.1999).

Regarding dre impact of fish-eating birds on UKIishedes, the conclusions of rhis res€arch indicatethat:

both cormoranls and qrey herons may somelimes rmpacrgreaily on intensive llsh farms or ish ponds, though lhesecan generaly be guarded lrom a ack.

impacts from bolh cormoranls and qoosanders are ontypoony understood on sl waler coarse and game ltsherjes,lhouqh high wound ng rates irom cormorants may be a

bolh comoranl and qoosander impacrs on samon a€ tikety

to aliect pa and smots rather than adutl Ush. and sucheliecis may be smal n realon to those from fshjng al sea

. where rvers contain depteled salmon runs t may be necessary lo prolecl larqe par and smotts where pr6dalory

brds conqregate at th6 lime oi the smol run.

This work is summarised in Box 2.13. It s(atso that more research i".eq"i..d {". m"";"H 27

p€cts o{ this problem, and that it is cerahly un-wise to teneralise on the impacts of fish-eatingbirds on freshwater fisheries_ In the meantime, amanagement balance needs to be struck t etweenthe acknowledged high conselvation vatue of ihevariou" bird <pecier dnd lhe potentral economi,and conseNation impacrs of the birds at bothrive ne and stillwater fisheries.

2-8-3 Haht!:tt degratldtion

There are a number o{ situations where waterbirdttkough their very presmce de8rade the habitatrequred by recredhonal t].oup. S,me 5uch im-pacts, quite obvious to ail users of a paricular area,include the fouling of amenity grasslan4 for ex-ample, by swans, geese and domestic ducks, a well-known nuisance to picnickers, walkers and an-glers and perhaps even a health risk. Grassed ar-eas may becom€ slippery, with the possibility oIinjudes from {alls. Damage to habitat for exam-pie, by overgrazint or tampling may also be anissue in parks, as well as bank erosion where bhdsftequently commute between land and water.\ 4ilst these problems may well b€ serious at somesites, they have not been quantified and mayequaUy apply to other foms of mess, for eyamplefrom dogs and general litter (see Allan er d/_ 1995).

On several southem England dve1s there have beenconsistent complaints from Iishery managersabout irmature herds of mute swans, up to 100

WETLANOS FOR WATERR|RD5

28

ston& moving into sections of dver and stripPingout virtually all oI the water crolt4oot gowth.Under low-flow conditions, plant growth has b€en

poor and the effect o{ the swans marked. Watercrow,{oolprovide. cover lor lFh.5ub-lrdtc' for in-

vertebrate communities, and maintains dePths byretarding flows. On the River Wyly€, study of theproblem .huweJ that the.wdJL hprp removrngvital cover and insect food habitat for (scarce) wildb,rown tout, causillg the fish to vacate previouslyimportant IishinS areas and to move into the fewdeep pools that rnay have afforded better protec-

tion from P1€dators.

Local mute swan populations have increased mPidly in recent yearsi blds feed on reseeded pas-

tures in winter/early sprin8 and also on aquatic

fldnt-. .u. h .rr !\ aler crow]ool. dc the\ eroh inthe sprins and summer (Trump et aI.1994).Ho\N-

ever th€ prcblem of over-grazinB o{ the watercroi,i.4oot is mther inEactable since mute swans

are protected species, are long-lived, tend to rc-tun iJ moved and are not €asi1y displaced by tra-ditional scaning techniques. Flocks of mute swans

impact lhe most on water crowloot growth and iJ

prevented from using grasslands may well vacate

the ar€a. The problem appears to be a genuine di-lemma for anglers, rcqui ng turther research,

including {ield tials, which are underway.Iai more subtle habitat degradation may be medi-

WE|LANDS FOR WATERB/ROS

ated through food chain eff€cts. The r!'cent case o{mute swans overgrazing important in-stream trou thabitat Fovides an important and Iitting exam-ple (Box 2.14).

2.8.4 Prctected species dntl ?rotected wetlan.ls

Most waterbirds benelit from extensive legalproteciion under national and internationallegislaiion and agreements (see Section 4.2.1).

Similarly, many o{ the sites they frequent areproteLted Con\er..ly therearc no sur h provicimcfor sportsmen or the sites that they use (Spmy

1994. The activities of recreational groups are

sometimes compromised b€cause of the need toconserve waterbirds and their wetland habitats.lor example:

. on many prolecled siles, lhere is a mainla ned coarse

ang ng close season whlsl the lega need 1or this reslrc

lion has been removed irom mosl si l!watere (bul is sll

avaiab e al the d sfieton oi lhe owner).

. lhe zonins ol w dfowling to ce ain sites, severe weather

bans and reslrictions on numbers ol days of perm lled shoot

ng on many resedes may limit the degree oi parlicipalon

by widlow 6rs in a g ven season.

. planning decisions often go aqa nsl some sporls develop

menls, such as saillng, waler and jei-skiing, as a means

of reslricling d sturbaice lo waterbirds and olhei w dlfe

There is olten a considerable overlap between areasfavoured by waterbirds, the areas proiected forthem and areas where spo sme'n wish to pursuefieir hobby. Waterbird and wildlile conservationis som€times viewed as too rcst ctive by somesports paticipants and, in som€ cases, is believedto be limiting ihe enjoyment a]ld development ofrecreational activity.

In some areas, th€re has b€en increasing conflictbetween recreational a]Id other demands {or wa-ter space as recreation became more popular,d'lhouBh .olulion- tu rn.rn\ o( lhe.e d,c bcintimplemented by water managers. Ior example, inthe 1990s, Northumbrian Water undertook a

straiegic review o{ the values of all its reseftoirsfor conseration and recreation. Ihis involvedstudies oI the effects of recreational disturbanceon waterbirds as well as ar assessmcnt of eachsite for conseffation value (habitats and birds)and {or recreational use (site characteristics,acc€ssibility, visitor facilities, d..)- Ttjs led to astrat€gic plan at regional and siie level whererecreation was given pdority on some waterswhilc (onrprvalron \^rr d--essed d. beingmore impotant on otheE and recreation stopped(Spmy 1994.

29

WETLANDS FOP WATFRBIRI)S

3. WATER.BASED SPORT AND RECREATION

30

3.1 lntroduction

Until the late 1950s, access to rcservoirc supply-ing potable water was, in most cases, severely re-stricted because oI the fear o{ pollution from rec-reational participants. The freedom from distur-bance meant that they were very attactive towaterulrds and even in the 1950s held substantialnumbers of lrrds. Disturbance from recreationalactivities was not a problem " ...1n\titxo ofttu present

policy oftlie uater autharitj$, who as abot 4 aftftmlyset agahtsl any Jont of human intelfcrcnce uith ttuit/ese,?oirs" (Atkinson-Willes 1961a).

Since then, however, the demand for reqeation andaccess to the countyside, especially on or nearwater has escalated and the policy o{ landownelsand auihodhes conholling water has been underpressure to change in the directron o{ relaxation ofaccess restrictions. Initially this was signall€dthrough a Code of kactice {or water authodtiesand eventually through the Countryside andRights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000.

A number of.tudies hdve been .-drried out to in'vestigate the needs for, and participation i4 waterbased spot and rcseatron by govemment depan-ments, recreational organisations such as theSports Council, and individual sporting and rec-readonbodies overthcyea$. How€ver, these havenot rcsulted in official changes of policy or legisla-tion to protect or enhance recreationalopportunity.

3.2 Current pollcy on th. provlslon olweter-ba5od recreationat tacilitieg

Within the UK there is no eff€ctive leSal basis forthe provision or enhancement of recreationalvalue, equivalent to the intemational (Special Pro-tection Area), national (Site of Special Scientificlnleren, or reSional r Loc.J Ndrure Re.en d desig-nations for conservation. Until rccently, the onlyrecognition of the right o{ sport and recreational

WATER. qASEO SPORT ANO RECPEA ON

activities to lay daim on natural resources, alongwiLh otler land u-es wd' lhe Departmenl of tn\ i

ronmen(s Planning Policy Glddance on Sport andReoeation (DoE1991). TheGuidancerequirestlutLocal Authorities plan for recreational activitieson regional. sbr(ural. unjtdr) and localplanninBIevels. However, although some spoits such as

water skiing have defined dleir needs, standardsand f.r, iliLres dl d lo.rl .rnd reSiondl lerel. thi' i"not being coordinated into a comprehensive strat-esy (Sports Council 1992).

The Sports Council recognis€d in the eady 1990s

that $ere was a n€€d to adopt policies fiat arebased on the sustainable use o{ the natnral r€-sources of the countryside (Spofts Council 1992).

However, there has been continued frictlon be-tween wateEports and conservation which wasof concem to both sides. This has, at least partly,been due to the lack of agreed mefiodology toweiSh recreational values and to compare &emwith conservation values. In additior! ma]ry areas designat€d for conseflation or landscape rea-sons are oftm also key areas {or both ilrlolmal andorganised water-based recreation. The need forfurther research into the integmtion o{ recreationand conservation on water areas is being recog-nised, and the recmt commission€d research andihe .t(p ' td-km 6 d ( onsequmcc by Nor+r u mbrianWater (Westerberg el

"1. 1994, Spruy D9n ifirs-

trates the progress that can be made in ihe sEate-gic management o{ wetland resources for the betr-€{it of recreational users and conservation

Recognjsing that recreational userc of water areashave a legitimate dght for their interests to be con-sidered in the stategic plarming oI water resource

use, the attitude of govenrment agmoes, local at1-

ihorities, voluntary bodies and pnvate utility com-panies towards such use has clanged radicallysince the 1950s and particularly since the 1980s.

There has been a rccognition that the needs of rec-reational users should be met where these do not

conflict significantly with other uses of the counrry.ide. Mod rei en Ll) , Ihp Dpfarlmcnt of tn\ ironmmL Tmnspot and the Regions (DETR) (laterThe Department {or Envircnment, Food and RualAffairs (DEIRA)) commissioned a report into thecurent panticipation in and prcbable tuturc needfor water- based spot and recreatior! and BrightonUniversity's Sch(x)l oI the Environment caried outthework (B ghtonuniversity2o02). The follow-ing account dmws substantialy on that report, indescribing the current position and possible tu-tuIe needs {or recreational activities that mightinteract with wedand birds.

3.2. I Governnent policy

Ihe government departuent most concemed withrssue( o( acces\ is rhe Departmcnt for tnviron-ment Iood and Rural Affairs (DEFRA - wasDETR)- lts policy was outlined in a recent paper(DEIR 2000), which contained the Iollowing state-

"The gooemment ua ts to encal.ffage people to make

use ofinlnnd watEnLtalslu leis re andre ertion, tout-ism md spott. Mnny zL\ttEt rDays MeToeLl stllfrl pb1-+

ure boanng; dnd ruDing, cnnociq arul sailing arcuidespread. Angling isaery fopl.tlltt. Muchlarger nl.m-be$ofpeopb se the@dknals fu infonnal recreaqon

such N wakbry, clclin8 and er?bnng the watffioayheitage. The uafer.ralq are an important to ism rc-sowce, suryortiry a larye lnliday hirc-boat inLlNW.We ,uill? aun\p thpit Bteatet u-pJor rcdntion: n-crensen accxss for tlu Voltng, riisablrd antl diratuai-taqtd: andbpttff, ommuni.ation u\1h th? aide.t fr<-ible rdnse of usarc."

In England, plarudng regulations place a duty onlocal authorities to take the needs oI spot and rec-rcation into account in planning policy. However,it is gmerally considered ftat tllele is a lack ofsuJficient specfic guidance on a[ kinds o{ sportand reseation provision in England and Wales.Re(redtiondl Sroups , onsider lhal lhe pro\ isionofwatex-based sport and rccreation is r.ulnerableto competinS land us€s, particularly conservation(Brighton Unive$ity 2002).

There is a general presumption tllat access to thecountryside shodd be dllowed udF.s there is anover-dding reason why it should not. The Coun-tryside and Rights of Way Act (2000) aimed to ex-tend the rights of access, whilst also saJegualdingthe rights of landowners. It created a new right oIaccess to oper county and registered colllrnon

land, modemised the ri8hts of way system andstrenSthened wildli{e enf orcemmt a1ld protectio&particularly to SSSIS.

The policy of govemment at present is that water-based sport and recreation should be accommo-dated wherewer possible; though not to the extentthat it damages the natural environm€nt. Thispolicy is being translated into access policy bygovemrnent aSencies such as ihe EnvironrnentAgency and English Nature.

The Environment Agenry has duti€s relaung toConseFatior! Re!.reation and Fishedes, amongstodrcN, and their poliry on access is broadly based:

"The EmJnonment Agency uilL pranote su:;tohableincrcaeed acrrss uhere it aiilL not afuersely impact alleaisting uses afid users, tfu economic and @nsematiotl

?al e of the site, a d associated afen, noa and in the

Iuture. Subject to reso rccs, wewill encauraSe access

nhere manryed sol tians csn be foand to remooe ud-

English Natrue ha.s a duty to protect and enhanceconservation interests; howevea ifs stance to-wards access and reneation is tolerant (EnglishNature 2000):

"Efi4lish Nature rccqnises tJut redeatjonal p,rrsuitsin the coLntryside pLay all ilnporta t role in people'sli,e. and in ,ont bLttinE to the -n, nl and p,onon ,,

well behgofconm ities.l\4ren dealtuguith the widerange ol reoeatjonal actioitjes whi& take place in thtcolt hlside we uiLI be guided W the need to sustaillo r ruhtral tuntuge for all to enjoy nou) and in ttu

Potiti)e benefrts ftom recreationdl actioities can be

achinei where there is a gaod auar ess antl andel-staruling ofwildlife and nat ral fdltwes by those participntjng in nuntryside recleation. An! hrcome gen

erakd can be sed by ltnd managers to sustain andenharce tlrc nat rnl daironfiefil under thdr conbol.Nel, rccreationdl Lleoelopments, such as galfco rses otgrurel pits used fat uatenpon' if se sittueLy sited,

n be desgned to nnintain and enhance existingroil,l-Life habitats anrl can be used to restorc or creale neuhabitat which is oaluable fot uiltllifL.

Recreatian may also hltot unuelcome ihpacts iltcl d-iry pwsit:nl damage to pLants anLl sensifi@ geological

features throqh trampLing and ercsion, collectjltS ofbiolo\ al at falarontoloqical . et, enr. ,hatrye, inwaterq ality,localisen disturbance k uildlile, panicu-

3I

WATER RASEO SPORT AND RECREAT/ON

32

larLy birds, and negathr lry-pratlucts s11ch as naise,

artifcial lightnq, dq etreta nru|littel.

Etlglish Naturc's oision is for @untryside recreatio

uhich nntibut?s to sustllinable dpoelopmenf and en

?ionme talLv sustuinablepnctjcEs. This means that itneetl$ to )oid dana4e tn i pottnnt and implaceableuitulliJeassets,ninimisea d canpeflsdtt fully fot athet

twtoidable cf:t'ects, and shauld conttib te to the deLi'o-

erv ofUKBiodil)(tsity Actio Plnn taryet$ dnd objec-

3.2.2 Local ond rcgional policies

Local alltholities are responsible for ensuring thatr€{reation is hlilt hto the planning process andthat recreational users can participate in their ac-

tivfies withou t risk to their health.

3.2 3 Watet co pd y policies

Recredlronal pror sron ha. been oppned up inmany oI the larger reservoirs, where sparial andtemporal zoning o{ activities have become thenorm, to ensure that redeation does not impact onlhe, onicn alion dnd dmenity ucc. of re\en oi'..Indeed the needs of consefiation and reffeationwere taken into account in dre design of the reser-voir, now Rutland Water which was flooded inthe second halJ of the 1970s. ReFesentatives o{recreational and conservatiofl groups met wellbefore the resesoir was flooded and agreed thedesiSn and purpose of each section of the resetvoir, including the creation of waterbird habitats

in dre form of bunded lagoons. Now, the reseftoiris the most important endosed water {or waterbirdsin B tain and the site having the greatest partici-pation in water sports and recreation (Appleton1993). lt is one oI the premier fisheries in the coun-try and probably the most important single site formany forms ofboating. A1l the water supply com-panies now provide varying degrees of access forsport and rccreation/ the kind a]Id number of ac-

tiviries being dep€ndent on the size of the waterand other attributes ({oI example its importancefor consewation and serlsifivity to disturbance).

BoLh Lle reservrirs thdt hJve been crerled rincethe 1970s have had visitor facilities incorpomtedand public access is encouraged. Kield€r Water,Northumberla]ld was flooded in the early 1980s,

the Visitor Centre there attracts an estimated300000 visitors a year (Spray & Bacon 1994. Itsrathet high altitude, Breat depth, stcep sides andenclosed surrounds makes it rather unsuitable forwildlowl and NorthumMan Waier make it a highpiority Ior recreation (Owen ei al. 1986, SFay1994. Similarly, at the Sevem Trent rcselvofu atCarsington Water, opened in 1992, visitor Iacili-ties were planned from the outset, and the site isnow a major tourist attraction in the region. Atboth, zoning of different activities errsmes 0lat rec-reaLion and waterbird conservation can co-existand also that different relreational activities donot interfere with each other.

Box 3-1 gives a summary of $e activities Fovided{or at the reservoiff of the main regional water

WATEP RASED SPOPT AND PECREA ON

companies. Ceady, fishing is the most commonlyallowed dclivity. lrl currinS on 7lr% .f rL..(ryoir,.Water skiing is one of the most disturbing activi-ties, not only to wildlife, but also to other recrea-tional users, so this tends to be allowed on very

Rights of access to inJomal rccrcational usels ar€generally provided {ree of charge, though charBesare generally made for water sports (which aregenerally licensed though clubs), and in somecases for parking. Often, visitor facilities such as

toilets, pi.nic sites, visitd cenhes (6 of the 7 reser-

voirs built in the last 20 ycars have visitor centes),hides Ior birdwatching are provided {or open access, and the costs of these are met from generalwater charges acrcss the region. Although pro-vrdinS fd.rLlic- is .oslly. mo\l wdler.omparues, onlinued lo inve'l m lhem dflpr fri\ ali.dhon. mmost cases spending being increased. The pdvatecompanies realised that pmviding good facilitiesfor visitors (generally also their customen) wasvery good Ioi ih!'ir image and many of the cornpa-nies use their visitor facilities to convey messagesto the visitor about thc water and sewerage

The Water Seffices Association published a re-port in 1997 assessing their pedomance and vi-sion in relation to cons€Nation. access and rec-ieation. Their conclusions, as quoted by Spray &Bacon (1 997), were that the water companies had:

. atlained a balance belween env onmental operalona and

receationa lnleresls on many of lhe r reseryoirs and land

. provded mi iois of vis lors wilh educal ona and recrea

liona Iacillt ss and access lo a19e areas oi couniryside

and lhal lhey would:

. codtinue promot n9 suslainable developmenl and manage

me;r of rhe r Land hold nqs and prope iesl

. and expaid opporlunities for recreation and educalion fa-

c ilies where appropriale.

3,3 PErticip.tion in waler-ba5ed .port.and recrealion

Analysis of the UK Day Vjsit Suvey figures (con-ducted by the Sutrial and Community Planning Re-

search in the mid-1990s) indicated that about 1 2 %

o{fie adult population ofthe UK (ovey 5 millionpeople) undertook recreational visits to inlandwaters, though whether thly used the water or thesurounding land is not rccorded. The de$ee ofparticipation is increasing, with more recent fig-ures indicatinS that 25% of the population visitedBalercide. dnd lhe dssociated.pend of Lho.e vrsiting water was f2.6 billion.

Other surueys involvinS segments of the UK popu-ldrion indi.dtp thdl lhe lc\el ol pdrlicipalion inactive water sports is acclrfate, with about threequarters of the participants being adult males.Overal, the tend in parhopahon rate is relatrvelystatic, though it varies for the different sports (see

Box 3.2), and expert opinion suggests ihat demandis likely to remain static in the foreseeable futuie(Brighton Universitr, 2002). Box 3.2 gives an indication of participation in some of the active sports.

3.3.1 .4 gling

Anglin8 or fishing is one of the most popular andwidespread of recreational activities. In Englandand Wales alone there was an estimated 3.3 mil-lion anglerc in the mid-1990s (NRA 1994b). Thenumber is fa y static (Box 3.2). Coarse an8lersare by {ar the most numerous type of angler in Brit-air! involving an estimated 2.3 million people.'Coane' angling normally refeG to the pursuit offreshwatff fish - species such as common cary,crucian cary, tenclr common bream, rcach, rudd,chub, dace and barbel (members of the carp fam-ily) - as well as other species such as perch, pike,eel, zander and catrish. Coarse angling is under-taken on streams, rivers, ponds,lakes and canalsand is, thereforc', a vexy widely practised spolt witha great potential both Ior positive environmental

33

WATER RASED SPORT AND PECREAT/ON

3A improvement and adverse disturbinS eff€cts orhabitat impacts.

Came frshinS include. ri\ er.md ldLe angtin& pri-marily for fish of the salmon Ianily: salmon andsea trout/ hown trout, minbow bout and char.Many peoplc also include fishing for the graylingas Same angling on account of the "sporty nature"of this fish. There are Iewer game anglers thancoarse anglelsi about 1 miuion in the mid-1990sin Bdtain (NRA 1994b). There are a {urther 2 mil-lion or so sea anglers in Bdtain (National Trust1995). Sea an8lers fish either ftom beaches or fromhodl- and lalp a ver\ w'de \ afl cty ot Ii\h \pcr ie-.The collection of bait for sea angling occurs year-round, with a peak in winter.

There are numerous angling organisations andangling clubs, and the sport enjoys huge popularappeal. Anglers have a targe vested interest in themaintenance oI aquatic environmental quality andate an impotant watchdog on the verbank andlakeside, watchinB for pollution, low water levelsand other potential problems. New lakes andponds are often created specifically for anglingan4 with good design, these often incorpomteusetul wildlife habitat. Fishing interests may alsobe at the foreftont o{ habitat restoration projects,often delivering substantial benefits for wildlife.

A statutory coarse fish close season (15 March - 15

Iune m, lu5ive) applier toall fl ver.,.tredrrs drdin,.some SSSIS aild some canals. Site own€6 have theriSht to impos€ any fishing close seasrm if they see

fit on still waters. Salmon action plans have been

WATER. AASEO SPORT ANO RECR€AT/ON

ptepared by the Environment Agenq.{or about 50ri\er- in rh( Fn8ldnd dnll \ dles.dndmorea'<inpreparation. These include method, size and baglimit alld season rcstrictions. Similarly for witdttoui and graylin& sit€-specific restdctions arcimposed by riparian owncys.

3.3.2 Boating

Boating involves the use of boih mechanicallypowered (e.3. speedboats, jerskis, cruisers, canalbodrs) dnd non-pow<rcd {e.3. ,drl dnd roL\ ingboals. \ailboard, aid canoesr .rafl. Wdter*Uingoccurs in conjunction with the use of speedboats.

Box 3.3 summarises key in{ormation from 2001 onthe number of enclosed inland water and thelength of linear waiels being used by various kindsL,f boal-ba,ed w.rler.port tfiom Brighton Uni\Fr-sity 2002). This indicates that, apartfrom anglin&the activities take place on a raiher small propor-tion of the total irland water rcsource.

Water skiing developed in the 20th century withthe invention of the speedboat. Estimates of par-ticiparion are around 150,000 regular skierc and250,000 casual participants (National Trust 1995),with perhaps more indulging on an occasionalbasis (Box 3.2). There used to be intensive use oIsome sites, e.8. some 20,000 per year using Lak€Windermere, Cumbda (Spolts Council 1991).However, a full public lnquiry was held in 199+95, which resulted in The National Park Aurhor,iry imposing an effective ban on water skiing andjet-skiing on the lake through the intoduction of alnmph-I]Ped timil lorb,'at in Var.h 2000. Hosever, in order to give the tourism indushy time toadjust the limit will not be enJorced until March2005. The issue was fiat the activity mared thequiet enioyment of the area by many more peoplethan were participating in the sport (inJomationfrom the Lake District National Park Authoritywebsite). However, th€ issue is hody contested byv,,ater sports panicipants.

l /hen water skiing is allowed on a site, a club al-mosi always conrrols access to that site, and thenalional goveming body in Britain is the BdtishWater Ski Fede{ation.

There is continued $owth in the spoit and con-siderable demard for new facilities in almost allareas of Britain. However, conllicts with conser-vation and passive enjo).rnmt of quiet areas {orshared access to irlland vvaters is thought to be

8,8i4

194

%

3.7

37

5T

1.3

0

194

5,490

1,374

.mbn1g the developmer,t of the sport (Sports Coun-cil lqol). haler,(iir.g i. pprcer\rd to be nor-\.p'l utin8andd..rurbinglohrlotiFr.( , d fipr.p1989) though otherc consider the actual impact ofwater skiing to be very low, owing to iis rcstrictedseason and limited numbers of siies (Sidaway1989, Harbinson & Sell^,),n 1993). Though water-skiing is mosi commonly carried out from April toSeptembc'r (CEED 1993) the advc'nt oI dry suits hasle.lBll.eled lne wdter-.kiinB re.rron \o d! tu increase the overlap and the poiential for disrurbanceio wintering watL'rbirds (Vamey & Crookes 1989).

Jet skiing is enjoyed blr at least 9{),000 people an-nudll\ in BriuLn,\RA. un.iateo). fhelel*liir'dseasonis ostlyrest cted to tlle su nxner monthsand $e sites used are often tlle same or similar tolhe \ (rue. used tor.nFFJb,'at. ond h drer-J iingThe Personal Water Cra ft Association administerscompetitive racin& provides a code of conducLpromotes the spori and administers access.

Motor cruisers are 11scd extensively around Brit-.n er.ud-i(! lmd on na\ igJbte nvFr

and canal sysiems and certain large inland lakesand reservoir. Their use is mainly, thouSh notexclusively, restricted to the sunmer seaso4 witha large take up by touists. Canal boats are lesspowertu I than most motor cruisers and generaltyrestricted to Britain's extensive canal network.Canal boats are mostly used for pleasure and some-times Ior commercial puposes.

In 1988 there was an estimated 200,000 p vatelyor{ned powered craft in Bnhin, ranging fiom qnalloutboard dinShies to large motor cruisers (G.I cven-and , omnJn, lq88r. l'arri.ifJtron l-r- if-,''.r,"d ,Iron8.\ in .e.e.l.

'., rLIc- dnd t-lerp i.considered to be a con siderable shodaSe of acces-sible inland and coastal water (Sports Council1991). Along the coast, there is a public dght rotavigate all waters, u{ess removed by statute.

35

35

Bitain has ovff 8,300 kilometres of inland water-way that are or were navigable. kincipal marrag-ers of inland navigable waters includ€ BritishWaterways, Environment Agency, Broads Author-ity and many other local authorities or groups. Anational survey o{ boating activity in 1988 esti-mated that arcud 45 % of aI boating activity t kF<

place on idand recreational waterways, with anestimated 75000 reSistered boats on the inlandwatel.ways system (cited in the IWA AC consultation documcnt). The number was sinilar in 1996,

when the Environmmt Agency and B tish Wat€yways together issued 60,000 licences to pow-cred craft and 16,500 {or non-moto sed boats.Clearly, canals ard inland rivers represert a veryimportant amenity resource.

Muphy ef al. (1995) consider that rccr€ational boat-in8 on n,v16"ble wdter- F lil el) ro incred.e..in, e

in 1993 restoration schemes were in progless on160km of dvem and 1,014km of canals. Restora-tion plans for another -l36km

o{ dvers and 143kmof canals rvere being developed and a substantialfu{ther list of waterways was being evaluated.Such restoralion schemes seek both to re establishexisting navigational networks and to establishnew till(!. lt i! in(\ it.rble that.onllict, w,rl ari,ebetween canal rcstorcE and devotees of derelictcanal systems, which often harbo abundantwildli{e resources. As with other forms of pow-ered boating, motor cruisers and canal boats havethe potential to create wash and physically dam-age bankside and indrarmel veSetation, with pos-

sible implications for waterbirds. An example o{the kind oI conflict that can arise is in relation tolhe resloralron of lhp \4ontBompry ( dndl .orndvi-gation. In its un-restored state, the canal was o{geat conservation importance, particulady {or itsaquatic plants. AII the Welsh pans of the canaland some of the En8lish sections wer€ designatedas SSSIS. Th€re were considerable potenlial con-flicts, which would be bought about by the resto-ratio& and some conservation goups yigorouslyrcsisted the plans. l lhen the p1arc went ahead,British Waterways, navigation Sroups, local au-lhoritie- and , on.en alron Sroup- toincd rn a

Montgomery Canal I\4arnSement StateSy to over-iee Gre de\ elopmenl dnd de\ i\e $ ay. ot minimi\-ing its impact. Conflicts are still likely, but thegoup is actrng positively to minimise the eflect oInavigation on the wildlife resource.

Sailin& govemed in Britain by the Royal YachtingAssociation (membership 90,000 in 2001), includeswindsurfin& and is a very popular pursuit within

WA|FR EASED SPOPT ANN PFCRFAT/ON

coastal and ir and wetland environments.In198&there we're an estimated two million active sailorsand wind surfers in the UK (Martin et dl. 1989).

Over 1200 sailinS clubs were in operation in B tain in 1990. Additionall, ther€ are some 150,000

to 300,000 wind-surfels, with a conlinued thoughslowing groMh in popularity (NRA, undated),though this is either an underestjmate or thenumber of participants glew after the NRA survey(Box 3.2). 1.5 million people in the UK sail (Na-tional Trust 1995) and tllele are also sub-aqua clLrbs

opentinS in inland wate$ and on the coast. ThedeSrep o[ inlcrc.l i. growin& .md profr( ien. y i-generally at a high level; sailinS was the most suc-cesstul spot, in terns of medals, in the Sydn€yOl),mpics in 2000 {or the UK.

Previously card€d out mainly between April andSeplember. sdilmS dnd r\ ind\urhng arc bNt,mingmuch more of a year-round activitr,, especially oninland waters (CEED 1993). This has been facilitated by the development of wet- and dry suits,which allow sevenl hours oI cold weather watersporis for people of average constituiion. Wintersailin& coupled with the {act that sailing can, i{allowed, cover most oI the surface area o{ typicalresenoirs and gravel pits, b ngs considerabtepolenlidl ( onJI.I t^ rth r dlerbird,on.ervation in-terests. Sailors also want weed beds to be cut toalloh therd, rivi$. r hich ma) be.rgain,ilh"interests of wildli{e. There is a tendency now to useredev€loped docklands and back excavated areasof disused low $ade land widr water &ontage topro\id. rarilities for boaLin& so Lhdt Llu5 pro\r-sion does not conllict with wildtife interests. Theredre al.o mdn) e\dmtles ot (dndl reslordtion-which allow boating without detriment to cons€r-

In 2003, the Bdtish Canoe Union boasted an esti-mated 21,0U0 members, with participation inoeas-ing (BCU data). Including casual and holiday ca-noeists, Leisuie Consultants (1989) consideredthere to be up to 800000 participants. The reportof the National Tltst (1 995) indicates tllat 1 mil-lion people canoe at least once per year and morerccent data confirm this (Box 3-2). Several pur-pose built facilities have been created {or white-water canoeing in the UK. Otherwise, canoeistsnavigate B tain's dver and canal systems, thoughonly c.10% of navi8able dvers may be legaly a\rail-able to canoeists (Sidaway 1994) There are alsoCanoe Access A8reements, which cover more ar-eas and help coordinatio& through Canoc AccessOIficers, to many river sysierns. Canoeing is a yealround activity.

3.3.3 WiLlfo\|tins

'Wildfowling' is the name most commonly at-tached to the spot of hunting ducks, teese andsome waders dufing moming flights {rom rooststo feeding areas or dudng retum flights at dusk.Wildfowling is by lone wildfowlers or by organ-ised groups, and involves the use o{ shotguns orboat-momted, large-bore fixed cannons ("punt-guns"), which are capable o{ kiling many birdswith a single shot.

Callaghan e, nl. (1994 estimate that therc are morethan six milion wildfowlers world-wide, takinginexcessof 23millionwate owleachyear. Within

ihe UK an esiimated 160,000 wildfowlers kiltaround a million birds each year (Haradine 1983).Many wild{owlers are affitated to the British As-sociation {or Shooting and Cons€rvation in Brit-ain (:111,000 oembers - National Trusi 1995), tointemational hunting Iederations and ro localwildfowling dubs. Wildlowling takes place on thecoast and inland wiih many wildfowling ciubsdirectly contrclling access to important reluge d-cas and exercising sole or shared management re-.non:ibilrrv. thF bc-t e\dnlplc being at Lindi-tdmein north ed.l Tngland.W Jtotrling.dnbp, rm-portdnt iour, e of in( omc lor r etldnd owner..

Wildfowling goups havc become an imporranidrivmB for, e for welldnd con\ervatror. ihe lrinciple of using the bird resource in a sustainableway can substantially contribute to werland con-seNation, providing the negative effects oI

'vildfowling are avoided or minimised.

3-3.1 Inforndl recredtion

Walking (for more than two miles for exercise andpleasure) is easily dre most widespread recrea-tional activity in B tain. Walking is essentiallydn un-govemed d, liyi t) , bu t mem bpr-tup o rga n isdtions in Britrin includc the RomblFr's A5!o(idtion and the Long Distance Walker's Association.Illc number. ol people wallinS in wetl d ervr-ronmmts is difficrlt to asc€rtain. However a gen-eral survey in February 2000 {ound that 77% of theadult population of Britain say they walk for

37

WATER. EASED SPOPT AND PFCRFANAN

pleasure at least once a month and 62% stated thatthey had recently been {or a walk of more than twomile' (info"marion From lhe l(amhlcr. A..ocu-tion). Hence, millions of people may b€ involved;RA membership was 139,000 in 2003 (RA pers..omm.). Jn in, rcdn .,f nL.d rly 50d, in lhF prev:o'rcdecade. Walking club memberships are inr:reas-

ing and walking next to water, either coastal orinland is very popular, leading to high potentiallevels of disturbance. Residents and tourists alikeenjoy walkinp in the summer of 1992, over 50 mil-lion day visits were made for this puryose. Theintensity of visits is greatest in the fllmrner months,with panicular 'hot spot' for infomlal recreationincluding national parks, coastal beaches, riv€rs,canals and other scenic locations.

Walkers include birdwatchers, an increasinBlypopular leisure activity. The membership of the

RSPB alone is in excess o{ 1 million and a collrbi-nation of other orsanisations (WWT, WildlifeTrusts, BTO, cf..) must acco[nt for a similarnumber. The National Trust has over 3 millionmembers and rna]lages nearly a quater of a mil-lion hectar€s of land and 600 miles of coastline.Much of this lalrd and coastline is of very highconseNation signi{icance and is open to the pLrb-

lic. Managing people without impacling the land-scape and wildlife is a continual chaflenge.

Dog walkers are another significant group. Theieare an estimated 7 million dogs in BritairL withmany people exercising at least three (NationalTrust 1995). Uncontolled dogs pose a particdarmenace io waterbirds and other wildlife. Other

b ne. ol irxormdl rR-realion dch\.rh in.ludr''w --ming, nature study a]ld photography.

3a

WATER. BASED SPORT AND RECREAT/ON

4. HOW RECREATION AFFECTS WATERBIRDS

4.1 lntroduEtion

As considered earlier, there are sometimes conflictsbetween conservation and r€creational interests.The conflicts are two directional, with r.'creationalusers sometimes concerned about the presmce ofwateftirds and conseruatiori.sts woried about theeflects and impacts of recreation on birds. Thesemay include mortality inciderlts, but pimanily re-lale lo behdvi.urdl di.ruotion tluough erce.-ivedisturbance, habitat loss and degradation, andreductions in available Iood supplies for the birds-Clearly such elfects and impacts are of particularconcem when they result in a population declineor h herc dislflbulron r. dllprpd. perhap" forringbirds to use less suitabl€ areas and non-retuge sites.

ln this chaptcy, we assess the strength o{ effectsand impacts of recreation, whilst also notingwhefier drc apFopriate studies have been doneand offedng Suidance {or future research.

4.2 Eyidence for recr€ation-inducedmort.tity

1-2.) Mortality co cepts

Bird numbers in a defined popu tation vary tEcauseof changrs in breeding -u.(es". mortality. inrmi-

$ation and emigration. The estimation o{ thepopulation size oI a given waterbird species is nottherefore, a staightforward exercise. Many spe-cies are secretive wher breeding and widely dispersed in inaccessible w€tland habitats. Nestingattempts are o{ten unsnccesstul and juvenile morta1i5/ can be rapid and difficult to monitor. AIterbreeding many species undergo loca1, regional orintcmational migrations during which time flocksintemringle and diqxrse over a wide range ofhabi-tats (section 4.4). This complenty can bc undcr-stood with sufficient data, but thl inFormationavailabl€ is geflerally lacking {or most waterbird

Bird populations are aflected by many factorc, of-ten interacting in self-regulatory ways. Increasesin bird numbers prcduced in a given area maywell be offset by subsequent r.luctions in indi-vidual suruival jn a density dependmt mamer.Dmsit! htdepe dent lr,ottality factom act in a blan-ket way, inespective of population densiq, of thespecies in question, and can lead to sudden,marked population declines that may take manyyeaIs to recover. Relevant factors include the pre-vailing weather, including severe cold, floods,drou8hl.. caline incur.ion. ajler.rorm.. hurri-canes et . There can also be pollution incidentsand failures of food supply, such as unusual tim-ing\ of marine pldJ tonic bloom! er,. Thc (ingfisher is a waterbird often susceptible to densityindependent mortality (Box 4.1).

In contrast when competition {or food or space orpredator evasion occurs, the actual density of btuds

can have arl important bearing on individual sur-vival. Whcn this occus, one or more drrsiry-de-pmdfl I effl\rts hlluence individuals. DL'nsity-de-pendence is a subtle concept whereby deaths of

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERA|PDS

39

individual birds may be offset by improved sur-- - vi! alchanccs nf Lhose remdjring - d ndLural coun-40

terbdlan(ingmechanism.Density-dependen(ehas important consequ€nces for waterbid popu-lation dynamics, particularly with regard to com-pensating {or other sources oI mortality within $epopulation. The death of an individual bird mayhave little or no eflect on {inal population l€velsbccause, under certain circumstances, it is recov-ered by better survival o{ othe6 amonSst the fl(lck.

Clearly, there must be a limit to the population'sability to compensate for losses and it is likely thatthere ar€ tlueshold values (maximum yield) abovewhich any form of mortality necessarily becomesadd,fi", (Figue 4.1). Additive mortality trafflatesthrough directly to population abundance a goodexample is likely to be a duck sitting on a clutch o{eggs which is killed by a fox. The loss o{ the duckand her heeding output is likely to impact on th€local productivity of the popdation.

Consider a hunting club that shoots, on average,300 wigeon each year on a saltmarsh in southemEngland- At fbst sight ttus would appear to\eFesert a signficant impact on dre ducks frequentingthat stuetch o{ coast. Ovelafl, however, it is quitepossible that the birds killed by the wild{owlelsmay be,:ompensated for over tlrc course of tl-le win-ter by improved slfyival of the rest o{ the wigeonpopulation because more food is available. In thisca-se the mortality is .onpersafory, i.e. subsequmdyrccovered to some degee and the'harvesl deemedto be at a sustainable level (Figurc a.1).

(a) Th6 Additivo Mortality Hypoth€sis

Hunting mortality rate

(b) The Compensatory irortallty tlypothesl!

FguE 41. Annualsuruulw haresl616 (tom AndeMn & Bumham1976)

Tdle n.tr J situ.rlron whFrF a .hooiing bdn i. im-posed on a given goose species. If the breedingpopulation increases in responsc, to reducedshootinS presslre, then subsequ!'nt crowding onthe breeding grounds, wift accompanying habj.tat damage, may we[ lead to rcductions in goslingsurvival with a consequ!'nt decline in breedingoutput. Competition for resources (e-*. Iood or nesi-ing sites) has increased with population densityand moddlih hJ\ increa-ed m response. Ttus i-density-dependent mortatity in operation.

What is critical to unde$tand is where, and torvhat degree, within given lile cycles, density-de-penderce op€rates. This knowledge allows an as-

sessment of the likely ability oI a bird populationto, ompen.ale for in(rcd,es in mortaliq aL a grr ensit€ and at a given time of year. Ihere are few cases,

however, wlrcrc density-dependence has so fa]been demonstrated but establishing this conclu-sively is very difficult (Box 4.2). We return to theissue qf density dep€ndence in our considerationof shooting mortality, in the followin8 section.

=

e

.E

6

Hunting mortality .ate

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERA|ROS

Europe (Box a.5). Stable or increasing tends formost q11arry species (c.71%) was indicative o{ a

Senemly sustainable shooting regime. The onlyexception was pochard described as 'probablydeclining' (also by Kirby zf rl. 1995). In a {urther,more exteflsive, analysis, utilising indices ol seJI-

sitivity to huntinS (a{ter Madser & PihI 1993), avadety of population declines were apparent (Boa4.6), though centred on the Black Sea/easternMedrtenanednarea,and r ith noobMou- relahon-ship with hunting in Bdtain or nothwest Europe-Here, habitat loss and degradation may be thecausal Iactor (Fir ayson el rl. 1992).

As discussed elsewhere, a key question is whetherhunting mortatity is additive or compensatorywhich detennin€s the influence o{ haNest on popu-lation size. Rees & Rowcliffe (1995) have recentlymodelled the likely strengrh of density dependentmortality on waterbird species with diflerent lifehistory strategies. Species with the most potentialto compensate Ior hunring mofiality were thosethat are short-lived relatively fecund and close tothet equilibdum density i.e. aie curently abun-dant, e.8. ducks. Duck populations probably

41

4-2-2 Shooting nottality

Wildfowling is the only rccreational activity thatmay normally cal1se a substantial and direct mor-tality o{ waterbirds- This involves the hunting ofbirds such as geese or ducks, which a1e either killedor wounded and may or may not recover. Earlierreviews of wildlowling have clearly shown thatshootins disturbance (Section 5.4.1) influences thedistributions o{ birds (e.s. Bell & Owen 1990,Madser & Fox 1991 Madsen er al. 1995, Rees &Rowcliffe 1995, Fox & Madsen 1994. However animpact at the population level through mortalityor rcduced reproductive output, has been documented only mrely (Box 4.3). As with other studies of .ause and effect, the investigation o{wildfowling impacts is complex, requiring long-term experimmts to research ihe multitude of po-tential iactoE irluencing any particular water-fowl population. Research curently undeMay atLindisfarne NNR may be usetul in this respect(Box a.a).

Madsen et al. (1995) have recently assessed the sta-tus of hunted waterfowl lmpulatiorc in north-west

HOW PECREAT/ON,4FFFCfS WATFRB/PDq

12 nornally nrn below their equilihium densities and

their population densities will tend to be regulatedvia variatiors in Foductivity (duckling survival).If ihis view were corect huntinB mortality would,there{ore, tend usually to be comp€nsatory to other{actols causinS ducks to die. Inngiived, low-pro-ductivity species, hor /ever, such as geese andsb an., are probably more dl l€ylcd b\ in('Ipa.cc in

mortality rates but can b€ resilient in ihe Iace of aphase of years with adverse weather, as individu-

als may live lorg enough to br€€d successlullywhen natural conditiorc improve.

Overall, compensatory mortality may be relativelyrare in waterbirds (see ?.3. Anderson & Bunllam1976, Nicholls e, al. 1981, Krementz rf a/- 1988;

Sauer et nl. 1990, Trost 1990, Nichols 1991). It seems

likely that iI harvests exceed a critical 'thr€sholdleveL, then bird populations sufer marked additive rnortality and are driven into sharp decline.This threshold level will vary markedly betweenspecies and even within species between years -making its assessment a demanding procedure(dGcussed by CallaShan et d.1995,1994. Atbesta suitable 'envelope' o{ sustainable harest rates

could be estimated for qrarry species animpor-tant research topic for watedowl managers to ad-dress. !\rhere population declines ar€ detected,then voluntary measlrres or legislation shouldregulate hunting pressure by varying the allow-able hawest oI given species, restdcting the openseason, hunting areas, the timing o{ shootinS orplacing restictions on the types of weapons andmedrods used.

4,2.3 A gling littet

Fishing involves the use o{ equipment and acces-

sodes that can be dangerous for waterbirds. Stu d-ies su.h as those summarised in Box 4.7 show that

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERA/RDS

43

HOW RECREAflON AFFEC|S W,4.FRR/PDS

A4

a]lglers may discard a vast amount o{ angling lit-ter duning changes oI fishin& after tangl€s and atthe end of fie angling session. Nylon line readilyentangles tl1c legs and wings oI waterbirds, some-times ligaturing parts of the body and causing se-dous wounds. Furthemore, general litter? tin cans,hooks, baits and Bmund baits are sometimes alllelt at the watercide in large qmntities (Cryer &Edwards 1987a&b). The presence of large num-b€rc o{ maggots and ground baits may ofte.n temptwaterbirds into areas where they are at isk of en-tanglement with discarded dshjng tackle; the birdsmay, however, benefit from the lood resource.Swars and ducks are thc most frequently reportedvictims oI anSlin8 litter but many other less con-spicuous species may also sufer from anglinglitter and go undetected.

The full extert o{ waterbkd mortality from anglinglitter is not really known but recent informationindicates that:

. inspeclors lrom lhe Royal Sociely for ihe Protect on oIC're .y .o Al rals so6r' ar eqr va en. o z09 day( rrnan-houB dealng wilh 1,141 b rds and olher an mals killed

or hlured by lishing iackle batween May and October 1995

(Press release: RSPCA fackles Fishing Littet Lauts):

. an eslimated 2,000 swans are rescued annually as a re,

sull of incidents nvolv ng Ishing tackle, cost ng volunlary

rescue groups more lhan f134,000 (EA News Rel€aso No.

90, 12 Apr 1999).

. SuNeys ca led oul by lhe RSPB'S Young Ohlhologists'C ub revealed v6ry exlens ve ilter in rivers, lakes andgrave pls in southern England, ncud ng ins, lead and

other weqhts, foats as wel as qeneml litter such as catrs

and plasl c bags (RSPB dala) .

Clearly this js a significant problem and an RSPCAcampai8n and associate d leaflet, Here's A Line To

Rdz€zkr, was supported and used by the NarionalFederation of Anglers and their 500 affiliated(coarse fishing) clubs aooss the UK.A prolonged campaign would be usetul in mak-

ing anglers more aware of the problem-s associ-ated with angling litter, wlilst segregation of an-glers and swan leeding areas has b€en shown tobe effective in rcducing tackle-related iniffies (EANews Release No. 90, 1 2 Apil 1999). Ivlany coarscangling clubs reco8nise the fact that they may losetheir leases iI litter accxmulates on their watersa]}d include wamings in their club permit books.It is usual to ban any tin calls at the watemide andmany dubs will ban anglers {ound with litter artheir pegs, evefl if they did not discard it themselves- This self-regulation of envtuonmental proEIems by anglers is an encouraging developmentactively promoted by such bodies as the NationalIederation oI Anglers. The Salmon and Trort As-sociation has, together with other angling bodies,prcduced a Game Angling Code of Conduct thathas been widely circulated and should mise angler awareness o{ these problems.

1-2-4 IEad shat pobo i,s atul other shootins elfe.ts

Lead was once a common component of anglinglitter (Box 4.4, yet lead is highly roxic and hasbeen responsible for the death of large numbers o{wa terbird,. e.pe( ully cwan. (Goode lq8l. seaj-& Hurlt 1991, Pain 199? SFay & Milne 1988). In-Seiled ledd dJfecls lhe ncuromu{ ular s).tFm, in-hibits the nonnal tunctioninS of the gizzard andmay result in severe liver and kidney damage,marked anaemia and general emaciation. Birdsmd\ qui.Uv wedlen bul dic Jo$ \. I edcl porson-ing from angling was once a widespread problemfor swans in Britain and was implicated in localpopulation dedines (see Hardman & Cooper 1980,Birhead & Pexins 1985, Sears 1988; Thornas rt al.1987). Subsequently, an ineffective voluntary banon lead shot u$ wd- lollowed b) le8slalron in1982 banning the use of lead weights frcm 0.05-28.369 for fishing (see Kirby ef nl. 1994). Unfortu-nately, lead takes a very long time to degrade andlead poisoning continues where birds are exposedto shot present in wetland sediments. Howeverthe incidence oI lead poisoning in swans nation-ally has been ellectively reduced by the intoduc-tion of lead w€ight reshictions (EA News ReleaseNo. 90,12 April1999).

More recentl, attention has Iocused on the leadcartridSes used by wildfowlers; see, for example,the revi€w by Callaghan e, al. (7995,'1997).WildJowling carlrid ges contain toxic lead shot thatcan build up to very high densities whereshooting activity is intense. Be{ore any ban onlead, each year waterlowl hunters spread a total

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERR/RDS

45

oI9,000 metric tonnes of lead shot over the wetlandsof westem Europe and Nofth America and mostof today's waterfowl lead poisoninS originatesfrom this sorrce, Iead shot densities in marshyareas can exceed 1 million shot per hectare. Leadpoisoning can'knock-on' to prcdatory species suchd" bald cagle'. golden cagle\ and marth hal.ricr..and both common and protectcd species .Lte at risk.One o{ fie most extensive surveys oI lead poisoning was carried out in the early 1980s by Mudge(1983). This found that levels of shot ingestionwas signficant in dabbling ducks, at least in some

areas and that large mmb€rs of ducks died un-necessarily each year- Of 50 Whooper Swansfound dead in Scotland whose cause of death wase-tdbli\hed. 27 (54"/)had dipd ot Iead p.i"uningfrom shotgun pellets, as had 19 (21 %) of 90 MuteSwans (SPIay & Milne.t988).

There E noh \ rde'predd dgn emen|Il'LrIleJdpoisonin8 is an unacceptable foIIIl oI waterbnd mor-tality. Steps have been taten to replace lead withnon toxic altematives in England and Wales [Xo-rnas & Owen 1995; AnoD 1997), and non-toxic shotis now required 1e8a11y in Denmark, The Nether-lands, Norway and the USA, and is requiredregionally in Austalia and Canada (Thomas &Pokras 1993). Additionally many count es in Eu-rope and Alrica have aSreed, on endor.m8 lhe -AJricdn-EuJa,ian Migralory Wdterbird AgrFemcnl I

(section5.2.1.3) to a phase out of lead. Leadwasbanned over wedands in England in September1999, in Wales and Spain in 2001 and baff areunder considemtion in many odlel colrnties. Theimposition of a ban does not necessarily mean theelimination of the problem. For example, of asample of 29 of young mallard (birds hatched afterthe ban) examined in 2001/2002, 19 (66%) hadbeen shot with lead (Cromie el nl 2002). It isgenerally accepted that the continued use of leadwas due largely to ignorance, and educationprogrammes are being undertaken by shooting ;Lnd

other organisations.

The g zad of a lead po soned w ldfow cul open lo show thal biqhtqrcen siaining Mical ol po soned b rds.

HOW RFCREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERBIPDS

A6

Illegal shooting may affect Fotected species inother ways. For example, the 34% incidenc€ o{lead gunshot revealed by X-ray analyses of 272Bewick's swans at \ rlvT's Slimbddge rese1.ve, ex-amined {rcm 197&73, has remained fairly constantamongst birds examined ftom 1989-1992 and dur-ing 1995, indicating a substantial shooting effortaimed at this protected species (Callaghan ef al.

1995, 1994. It is possible that for eveiy Bewick'sswan womded a futher three may have been har-!(.\1.d. indi(aring d, ti\e pur-uil of lhi- -pft iF-.

despite ftrll legal proteciion.

4 2.5 Prc.lation ofwatetbinis

Many waterbodies are stmked with predatory fishfor angling purposes, or there is posihve management for them, and this may have important conscqucnces for wa terbirds. Pike have been recordedtaking a variety of waterbnds including youngcanvasback, redhead, teal, lesser scaup, gadwall,mute swans, mallard, coot and grebes. Youngwateftirds tend to be tal<en by relatively sma]l pikeof4&7b, m (0.7 2.7L8) dround lie wpeded mdr8rn'of slow-flowing rivers and stlearns (Bajkov & Shortt1939, Ross 1940, Solman 1945 Ahlen 1966). Theremoval of larSe pile rrom wdterfowl .anctuaric\.in order to conseffe the birds, may in fact be unwise management. Large pike often camibalisesmaller individuals and the removal oI matuespecimens usually leads to increased numbers o{smaller fish which are the principal Fedators o{young waterlowl (Wdght 1991). A {ew large pikeare, therefore, probably of benefit to watedowl, es-

pecialy when their pedation of inverteb,rate-feed-ing coarse {ish is taken into considemhon. If anypike are stocked into coarse fisheries, wfuch is

HOW RECREAT|ON AFFECTS WATERBlRDS

fairly unusual, then they wiJl generally be largespecimens so the net e{fect may be positive.

a-2.6 Trc signifrance of recrartion-in tusl tu 1alily

Our b eI revi€w of litenture and expedence hasidentilied wjldfowling as the key direct source ofrecreation-induced mortality in waterbirds, withindirectmortality adsingfromentanglementwithanSling litter and lead poisoning faom angling andwildfowling activities. Additionally, there is prob-ably a srnall amount o{ Fedation from native andexotic fuh species, stocked or managed for anglingpurposes. There is also competition-inducedmortality or depressed breeding success(see section4.5.2).

Though varying amongst species and, of course,with shooting intensity, shooting mofiality s€ems

most likely to be aLrir?e to natural sources oI mor-tality. The many examples where waterlowlpopulations have responded ro reduced levels o{hunring.prve to indr( dte lhdl qudrD populdhoruare probably maintained at lower than 'normal'levels by $is activity. There is widespread evidmcethat several protected waterfowl spl'cies are regularly shot and that better hunter education pro-

trammes may improve this situation. \ryhere pro-tected species are difficult to distinguish homquarry species then local balls may be apFopriatelo rn.rc<r{e ihe effe(tivene.- o( proleclion.

lhere problpm- d-p spU re, ogni.cJ hy re.ponsi-ble sporting organisations and int€nsive efforts arebeins mdde lo redu.e &reproblem.. rhrouBh l.gi*Iation and through education prognmmes.

{.3 Disturbance

Concem about rccreational dishubance (Box 4.8)is both genuine and widespread. Hill et al. (1994noted that 49 of 117 of Bdtain's Red Data Birdsw€re potentially affected or threatened by somefom of disturbance: habitat loss, water-based rec-reatio& walking in remote countryside, large scale

developmenis and hunting. Priichard ef al. (1992)

noted that high proportions oI the UK's 'Impor-ta]lt Bird Areas were affected: 62 out oI127 sitesin Scotlalrd, 56 out o{ 74 sites in England and 10out of 14 sites in Wales. At a European level 35

out of 129 bird sp€cies of'Euopean ConseffationConcem' were considered theatened or affectedby disturbance according to Tucker & Heat}l G99a).Clead, there is considered opinion that distur-bance is a major factor afecfing key bird consefta-tion sites over much of Britain and Europe.

Assessing the significance of disturbance has beena popular research subject and several groups oIresearclers have produced extensive reviews of

disturbance research (e.9. Dzubin 1984, Edington& Edington 1986, NCC/RSPB 1988; DaN$en &Korschgen 1992, Hockin el aI. 1992; Kellet '1995,

1995; Hi]l ?f dl. 1994 (seealso Box4.9). Studies ofdisturbance often need to take account of manyfactorc, such as the rclative effects of dif{erent typesof activity (boatin& angling, huntinS ?f..) and th€behaviour of differeirt waterbird sp€cies in differ-mi scasons and sit€s (see s€ction4.3.6). Hill ?frl.(1994 examined attempts to Foduce "distu$anc€gradients" a mnking o{ the relatively s€vefty ofdisturbance ftom di{{erent tw€s o{activity (Figufea.2) (see also Korschgen & Dahlgren 1992,Platteeuw & Henkens 1998b). These rarlge from arelatively passive low-level continuous source, tohhich bird" md) readily habiruale (r.x. the nor5e

From dn adia, enl motorh dvr. throuSh in, rcdslngIevels to an active high-level source where a siteremains species-poor as a rcsult o{ the dishrrbance

Clearly disturbance rcsearch is complex. The n€edto record and consider many variables means thatinterpretahoD and comparison between studies,is often difficult. For now, we consider distur-bances to waterbirds associated with differentq?es oI wetland rccreational activity. Through-out we highlight difficulties of interpretation andconclude with sorne general considemtions. In a

later section we consider the quality of the scienceavailable and outline future directions {or

1-3-l Shooting disturbance

Wildt Bling i. mon usudl) .djripd our J-rin8autunm and winter and is a noisy activity, involv-ing sudden loud sounds, that are necessaily closeto watefowl. Hunting disturbance can reduc€ feed-

17

Fgure 42 Disturbance grad ents (fom Fockn eaal 1992).

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERB|RDS

48

in& loaJing and roosting opportunities lor birdsand th11s may effectively constitute tempoGry lossoI access to habitat O{adsen er i11. 1995). Bell &Owen (1990), reviewing shooting in relation toother forms of waterbid disturbance, conclude tfEthunting displaces watedowl at geater distancesthan other {oms oI r€{reation, crcating wider ex-clusion zones (see also Watmough1983a).

Ma]ly studies are available that show a clear dis-placement effect of wildfowling disturbance, atvarious geo$aphical scales: flyway (amongstcountries), regionally (amongst sites) and locally(within sites) (8ox4.10). Conversely, there are stud-ies that did not show any displacement effect, e.8.

Tamisier (1976), Tuite ci ,1. 0 98a), Schricke (1983)

and Mudge (1989). Wherc displacement fromwrldloh lm8 docs o.cur. lhe rreadon ot retuge.should attmct birds from hunted areas. In B tain,Owen & Thomas (1979) described a large increasein usaSe of areas of the Ouse Washes, especialyby wigeon and swans, aJter conservation bodiespurchased large areas as rcselves. Although habi-tat management positively influenced this result

it was concluded that reduced distu$ance fromhunting was also a key factor. ln a larger scaleamlysis, Owen (1993) found a proSressive trendfor the nuinb€I of wigeon using British retuges toincrease as n€w sanctuaries became available andto stay in th€ refu8es longer as birds moved awayfrom hurting areas. Mad sen et dl. (1995) concludethat'be{ore and after' studies, makin8 use of ref-uges to redme hun ring pressure, have repeatedlysho*.n incr€ased bird usag€ of undisturbed habi-tat (in 14 of 18 cases examined). It seems as thoughdisplacement may olten b€ clearly associated er'ith

hunting disturbance.

Shooting djsturbance may also produce a numb€ro{ behavioural effects in addition to dGplacementand, importantly, may substantially reduce feed-ing time (Box 4.11). Taken together, these studicsshow that, when shot aL watexfowl ar€ o{ten forcedto change their intend ed destination and to seek asafe haven habitat that is as suitable elsewhere.Such havens may not exist locally, meaning anappreciable exta expenditure of time and flightenergy beforc the bird js able to rest for the night or

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERR/RDS

49

reach a profitable feeding site. Of course, therc isc onccm I hil bol h qu dJ-o dnd non-quafry .pec ie..including protected sp€ci€s, may sometimes bedi.rurbed (p8 \4adsen 1q88, Veile lo'rli \chnei-der-lacoby et nL.199LFnkke & Laursen 1994) andthat the altemative safe haven may not be as goodas the original sites.

Furdrer considerations lor waterbirds include thepotential impacts o{ hunter disturbance on flockstructures a]ld reproduction. Some waterbirdsexhibit a complex social structure, whereassociatron with a mate or o(tended family groupenhances social status and hence the best Ieedingoppotunities. Radio tracking oI individualCanada geese has shown hunting to reducecohesion amongst {amily units and increasemortality (Bartelt 1984. Snow geese also show

Breater rates of family disintegntion as a rcsult ofhmting distu$ance (Irevett & Maclnnes 1980).

ln a later study, Madsen (1995) showed thatfrequently distutbed phk-footed geese {ailed toaccumulatc nutrient well as anL{

subsequendy produced less young than birds notdi-lurbed wtulil usinB rhc ramc,prinS stdsinSarea. Madsen ?f dl. (1995) considered it likely thatmidwinter depletion of rcseFes, or a {ailure todllain.rili.dl.prinB lcvcl. of nutrient 5lore. pnorto migation to b,reeding areas, may also affect thereprodurli\e outlul in wdlerbird cpe.re-depending on endogenous stores for successfulb,reeding attempts. These subtle factors would seemto have the potential to be important in huntedpopulations of particular species.

I]OW RECPFAT|ON AFFFCT9 W,ATFPBIRI)S

50

Despite the obvious potential {or disturbance fromshootinS. not all studies record it as being of over-riding importance in tems oI the propodion o{occasions when birds are distuIbed (see GameConseFancy Trust 1995). For example, shoortingwas rcsponsible fol,

. 35% ol d sturbance lo turted ducks (Pedrol 1982)

. 34% ol dislurbance to snow geese (Be anser & Bedard

1989)i

. 6% of distulbance lo brent g€ese (owens 1977).

It is not known wheth€r redistribution by dis-turbed birds has ally longer term eflects uponwaterbird populations (Game Conservanry Trust1995). However, well-designed experiments (see

Box 4.12) are d€monshating a potentially v€ryimpodant effect of shootinS disturbance in de-pressing the size of wateftird populations-

HOW RECREAT/AN AFFECTS WATERR/ROS

4-3-2 A gling

Fishing, in both salt and freshwaters, is ay€ar-rcund and widespread activity that mayresult in disturbance to both breeding andwintering waterbirds. As waterbirds are spreadlhrou8houl lhe Betl.md habilal re.ource there rspotential for disturbance whe(ever rcoeationalactivities take place.

Fishing may cause displacement o{ waterbirds,ert}]cr between or wit}|in -ites, or a rcdu.fion innumbers. In an excellent early stud, Tydeman(1972 1978) took advantage oI vaniations in theapplication of close seasons (ftom mid-March tomid-lune) on gavel pit fisheri€s to assess ihe localeffects of the presmce and absence of coarse an-glels during the surnrner. The studies were under-taken at two $avel pits where there was no close

5t

season in -1973 but there was one in 1974, whilst a

third pit served as a contol with no close season

in either year. At the pits with a close season inho-duced, there was a marked increase in ihe nur-ber. of ne.tin8 bird< rwalerbi-rd. and -ongbirds),and many new species were recorded breedingand migrating Brough tlle site. Ovemll, the numtErof breeding pairs increased by 33 % and 58% at the

two pits, compared with a 9% increase at thecontlol site. A nrffked incrcase in numbers andspecies diversity of breeding birds was recordedwhen coarse fi;hing d id not LdIe place in $e .p ringat thes€ pits. There are several other examplesof waterbird displacement by an8ling [email protected]).

HOW RECREAT|ON AFFECTS WATERR/RDS

52

Particularly rigorous studies of angling disturbance have taken plac€ at Lindisfarne, north-easttngl.md (8o.4.14). ar llandcgtedd Re.pruoirsouth Wales (Box 4.15), and Ior the inland reser-voirs or \orlhumbrid (Bo\ 4.lbl fteLinJisfameexample effectively showed that intensive bait dig-ging was an important €ffect causing a markedreductron in shoreline usage by certain birds,lhoush n.lc lhdl $c mlen.ity of bdit diSSing in

this area was inde€d very high. It would thus be

valuable io repeat this t/pe of study over rnanyother sites to gain an insight into how widespreadthis effect is undcy more nsual bait-digging pres-surcs. Ihe study at Llande#edd Reservoir, southwales, produced clear displacemeni cffects, prob-dhly tinlcd lo fpdint.uc, e\'.'l hr Nor*rumbrianstudy was successlul in using simple !\pl'Iimentsto disentanSle various potential causal effects andin showing the importance o{ stillwater game an-gling disturbance to wate$irds.

Without rigoro11s eaperimental Plotocols, it is o{-t€n difficult to be sure that disturbance, for exam-ple from anSlers, is fte Iactor of most importance.

For example, Campbel & Mudge (1989) reviewedpossible reasons for poor breeding succcss ofblack-throated divers in the remote Scottish High-lands, concluding tentatively that whilst disturbJn, e ma) bc imporlanl il i. probdbly nol .r. si$nificant an effect as was oncc fear€d. Time-lapse

HAW PECREAT|ON AFFECTS WATERR|RO5

camlya studi€s at around 60 nest sites each yearshowed that anglers quite o{ten disturbed nestingdivers but ihat therc was no siSnificant difierencein brcedinS success between divers nesting on ac-

tively Iished arld relatively undisturbed lochs.Some patus were re$rlarly kept off the n€st {or 1on8

periods by fishemren but, nevertheless, managedto hatch thei{ clutches. Here, other factors such aspoor food srpply and habitat degradation wereperhaps of greater signi{icance. ln a {urther exam-ple, angling first took place at the newly-crcatedCarsington Reseruoir, De$yshire. in 1994 one yearafter the reseNoir rcached top water leve1 andanalysis of watefiild cormt data indicate that therewere sharp drops in the nLrmbers of pochard andwigeon using the site. However, other changes/such as standing stocks of aquatic invertehates,have also taken place making unambiguous inter-pretation of the r€sults difficult (Menendez & Bel1

1996\.

O\ crall. lhe.e rcldrivFl) tes .tudie- provide evFdence that angl!,r aciivity may indeed exert impor-lant inJlucncc! ov(Y the numbcN dnd behd\ rourof both b(eeding and wintedng birds at individualwetland sites. The effects have proved significantenough to persuade water managers to prev!'nta]lglers from using particular sites where the birdinterest is significant-

4. 3. 3 No*notot ised *aterctaji

Non-powered watercm{t include sailing and row-ing boats, sailboards and canoes and are widelyused on British and other wetlands. They can pen-etratc shallow waters and veg!'tated areas, thusaccessing a high proportion oa the available wate{space. Also, urlike wildfowling and anBlin& theuse of watercraJi is a gmerally high profile activ-ity, with large numbers o{ people involved. Th€presence of brighdlr coloured sails (moving at highspeed), the flapping sails of beached boards, coupled with the mmberc of people on shore follow-ing th€ sport means there is signi{icant distur-bance potential. Indeed, the use of these craft andespecially sailboais and sailboards, conshtutessport that is considered to be very disturbing iowaterbirds (e.8. Taapken 1982).

As ior other disturbance agents, thete is wide-spread e\.iderce o{ dishubance resulting in low-ercd numbers o{ wate6irds, displac!'mc'nt or re-duced breeding success from association with non-powered craft (Boxa.l\. In many of these studieehowevey, it is not clear whether the birds can com-

53

pensate for disturbance during the brceding sea-

son (by re-nestin8) or whedu forced moves to otherlocalitles, in summer or winter, actualy make anydiscemibledi{ferencetooverallpopdationrum-bers There are o{ten clear-cut cases of disturbance

but also ones that lnay have little impact on thecondition o{ the btuds, owing to the presmce ofsuitable altemative habitat nearby. Also, few ofthe studies reviewcd were long-term or investi-

Sdled other p\plrnal.rv ldL lorc in dny detail.Researchers should at least try to take account ofdifferences in food availability across the areas

being investigated as these may sometimes explainor contdbute to the effect being described (Box

HOW RECREANON AFFECTS WATERB/RDS

54

i

i

I

ii

100

80

60

2A

0

Mallerd

0

HOW RECREA ON AFFECTS WATERA|RDS

4.18). The inadequacies of the scienc€ lead to un-certainty about the significance of disturbance

There are, however, times when waterbirds can-not move, for example when moulting. This wasthe Iocus of a study by Gdce (1993) who rccordedsailboard disturbance at a site with moulting tuJtedducks. Hele, a1l birds capable of flight leIt the sitebui the iemainder underwent obvious stress. Suchdisturbance had the effect oI depressin8 the nujn-bels of moulting tufted ducks at this site {or sev-eral years.1.3.4 L4ototised i,dtet spotts crufi

Despite being a noisy and obvious form of recrea-tior! the use of powercd watercmft - motor ar1d

sp€€dboats and jet skjs - appears not to have be!'nthe fGus of rnuch disturbance research so far. Thefew studies available (Box 4.19, Bo)( 4.20) demon-strate clear displacement effects and whilst ptoEably insigniaicant at a national level, any local dis-tlnbance effects may be substantial (see also Tuiteet a|. 1984; CEED 1993),- The available rcsearclLhowever, is limited in scope, short-term and lacksthe scientilic rigour needed to investigate the relative importance o{ this factor amongst otheE likelyaLo tobe rnporlant. ln mo{t ( a-e.. zorunS in largesites or rest ction of these activities to one or twowaters (for example in gravel pit complexes) gen-erally minimises the effects.

4.3.5 Inforndl rccrcation

Inforrnal rccreation includes casual use of the coun-tryside lor bndwatchin& walkin& swimmin& dog-walkinger.. The etre.ts c,n waterbirds can includedisplacement, reduced numberc or densities andlowered reproductive output tkough nest destruction or chick 1o6s (ry. Pienkowski 1983, 1993). IrrcFlems with irfomal reo€ation normally arisewherelarge ftlmbels of people conSregate, for exampleon toudst beaches, in National Parks and at couLtryside beauty spots. It follows that most impactsoccur in the summer seasorr when waterbirds arebreeding, drough impacts at stagrng and winter-ing sites are sometimes also apparent. Problemsoften adse because there is coMict for prefenedhabitats between diving birds and people. For ex-ample, many dive$ and people like clear-waterIakes with convoluted shorelines, abundant fishstocks and islands. This can result in conflict be.tween them (Mclntyre 1994).

There have been rnany casual observations of re-productive failure and disturbance leadin8 todisplacements, both in summer and winter, re-ported in $e literatue (c.3. Cooke 1 9z; Juqlius &Hirsch 1979; Hand 1980, Andercon & Keith 1980jRobertson & Fiood 1980; BurSer & GochIield 1983,

Levenson & Koplin 1984; Inversen 1986, FluSer &Ingold 1 988, Buick & Paton 1989; Yalden & Yalden1989a&b, 'l 990). However, rigorous, in depth, stud-ies are rather few and {ar between.

On the fthleswig-Holstein coast, Germany, Iargenumbers oI beach-users displaced breedingkentish plovers, leaving large areas of potcrnalnesting habitat unoccLrpied (Schulz & Stock 1993).

Furthermore there was a sEong association be-iwem ihe intensity of beach disturbance and theIate of clutchloss. More than haff of ttrc nests {ailed,

HOW RECREAfloM AFFFCTS WATFRR|PDS

55

56

spalial distribution ofrecreational activities

HAW R€CREAT|ON,4FFECTS WATERB|RDs

with various causes includinB c rshin& egg col-lectin& Fobable inoeased pr€dation of untendedn€sis by BuIs and crows and perhaps by foxesand dogs. Studies such as these make it clear dlatrecrearinn can di\tla( e brced ing 14 aterbrrds fromwhere they would ideally like to be,6nd possiblyinto sub optimal habitats. This study is one o{ thefew to provide a clear link between the extent oIdistuftance and the survival/rcFoductive suc-cess o{ individuals.

On thcDeeesrua . northwe.tLrgland,e\.c-srvcbcach diihjbdnce hom da)-trilper(dnd lo, al reci-denl. wa. con.idered a hkel) rea.on tor decline.in the size of winter wader roosts (Mitchell et al.1988). Subsequent work demonstrated that bothknots and bartailed godwits, waders that had de-clined at the site, were pafticularly prone to dis-turbance and the numbe$ of knot werc signifi-cantly lower at weekends when recreational ac-tivity tended to be greatest (Kirby et dl. 1993).

Human disturbance (maidy walkers) caused con-siderable disturbance to wigeon at Stran8{ordLougb Nolthem Ireland but had a lesser effect onbrcnt gees€. This activity inteffered with the birds'feeding activity, which was alr€ady restricted because oI tidal pattexns. Human disturbance may

57

HOW RECREAfloN AFFFCfS WATFPE/RDS

58

have been a factor causing a decline in wigeonnumbers at the site, though other factors may alsohave been jnvolved (Mathers e, al. 2000).

On the Ere estuary..quth wert Fngland. Co.c-Custard & Verboven (1993) showed that distur-banc€ to oystercatchers feeding on mussel bedswas, at times, intensq reducin8 feeding time by upto 50%. However, dris was a localised ploblem,wilh mo5t rredint occuning a way finm thc majority oI beach users (e.9. on neap tides, at night, andwhilst the tide is advancing or retreating).

In art elegant study, Stock (1 993) examined the ef-fects o{ disturbances on sprin8 staging dark-bel-lied hent Seese in the Schleswig-Holstein pan ofihe Wadden Sea, finding reSular and variedsources of stim.rli which changed bird usage of[he area. As toudst numbers increased, the geese

tended to concentate in the best-protected areaso{ the north and south-east regions of the studysite. The ovelall r€sults indicate that parts of thesaltmarsh could not be utilised by the Seese be-cause oI frequent disturbance to feeding and that,as a conseque.ncs a considerable Foportion of theavailable food resource remains unused. Thiswould appear to be an important disturbance e{-I€ct that could constitlrte alr impact at popdation

Not all studies of hurnan disturbance have loundsuch marked displacement. For wintering black-tailed godwits in south-east Englan4 Gill ef dl.

(1998) fomd no evidence that hunan preserce hadany effect on the use that was rnade o{ estuaries orsites within estuaries.

4.3.6 l ter- a di tra specirtc yati.ition

The measurement o{'escape flight distances' (thedistance at whicl a flock of btuds tales flight whenapFoached by a disturbing stimulus) has oftenbeen employed to ty to characterise the relativesensitivity oI particular species to disturbance.Example data are presented in Box 4.21 lromwhich it appears that shelduck, goldeneye andcrrIlew are relatively shy in many studies, whilst,in general, mute swa& gebes and coot tend to tol-erate a closer apprcach. However, there is clearlygreat variability in the distances r€corded, bothbetween species arld between studies- Futher-more, iI the responses of the species were mnkedthe ordering would differ betwem studies. Therpa.lion ol lhe sdmespecier ma1 indeed bedilfer-ent in different habitats; Pierce ef nl. (1993) Iound

HOW RECREAf/ON AFF€CT5 WATERA/RDS

that the effect of fishin8 boats on wat!'rbirds wasIes- in habilats lhdl .rjtorded n ure (over thdn m

There are clearly dangers in g€nemlising the rc-sults of any single study to cover other sites. Itseerns that it might be impossible to gmerate'escape flight distances' that are genedcally useftrl.This is because the study of disturbance is complex. lndeed, $ere are at least eight main Iactors(see also Tamex 1979, NCC/RSPB 1988, CEED1993) that seem to determine the responses oIwaterbirds to recreational activity, and hence theeffects and impacts of that activity on them (Box4.22). Of course many of these {actors might co-vary or interacL turther complicatin8 the interyre-tation of disturbance rcspons€s.

1-3.7 Habituatio d .l facilil.ttion

Seveml researchers have demonstrated dlat somewalerbirdr md)'habitualc' lo di.rurban.c thi- ic

a behavioural adaptation by lean-fng to ignore orredme the response to a given disturbance stimulus. Cooke (1980), Titus & Vandruff (1981), Keller(1989) and Mclrtyre (1994) have all described ha-bituation. This ability to 'get used to' distu rbanceby peopl€ is manifest amongst familiar waterbirdspecies and in this ability may lie the key to thegroups' continuing success even in the crowdeddeveloped countdes of nortlrcm Europe. However,l /hite (1993) cautioned that whilst feeding birdsmay habituate, moulting birds appear especiallysemitive to distwbance, perhaps because they are'aware' oI their relative immobility.

Conversely, waterbtuds may'racilitate' to distur-bance. showLng a hei8htened rcspon.p wiLh increasing expedence (e.8. Platteeuw & Henkens1998b). Where birds do not habituate, and espe-cially iJ they facilitate their response to local dis-tubance, then the site will have a lowered'carry-in8 capacity', or there will be a decreas€ in thebody condition oI many individrals- Both factorspotentially lead to decreases in ovemll populationsize and thus it is impoftant to understand therelative abilities of vario$ waterbird species toshow habituation. The challenge for the manageris to consider how rea l a]ld impoitant the distuibing influpncc\ arc tor each .pecies. rememberingthat some may be more sensitive than otheE.4.3.3 Indirect effects

A very imporlanl indircct effe( t of d isturbdnce i-enhanced rates of predation. For example, Milola

Goldeneye - a disludance shy spec es

cf al. (1994), studying the suftival o{ velvet scoterducklings in rclation to boat disturbance, foundthat disturbance lengthened the swimming dis-l.tn, e" of ducUing\ and red u( ed the teeding rime.Frightened ducklings dived and dispe$ed awayfrom boats. Most importantly, however, while theduck was drawn away from her brood, bodr her-ring and great black-backed gdls opportunisticallyattacked the ducklings. The frequency o{ attacks

by gulls was 3.5 times higher in disturbed com-pared with undisturbed situations.

This study is important because it shows thar dis-tufbance to brceding birds, fuom any source, canrcsult in increased predation mtes, which mayproduce a]l impact at the site or even populationlevel Ior rare and endangered sp€cies. This may bea widespread phenomenon in coastal duckling-rearinB sites where gulls a1e common (Al und &Gotmark 1989j Keller 1991a).

4.3-9 The sis ilicane ofrecrcltional

It is impotant to bear in mind that we have pre-sented a series o{ restdcted views of disturb rein the previous sections. Natural sources o{ dis-turbance have been ignored and we have concen-ftated solely on human sources related to recrea-tion. However, in contrast to many naturaldisturbances, hu1ralr disturbances can be man-aged alld management can alleviate disturbancepressuf€s on the birds.

59

HOW RECREAT|ON AFFECTS WATEAA|ROs

50

the fkst few days after hatching when the youngneed regular hooding by adults to maintain [heirbody temperatur€ (e.8. Yalden & Yalden 1990).Disturbance may also prevent access to preferedfeeding areas for adults and/or young, and increa,se energy cosls if birds are lorced to move whenrcsting. Again because of $eir excelent camoufla8e, nest and eggs also can be desftoyed by di-r€ct trampling, and :dso by the incrcasing use oIoff-road vehicles - a palticular problem for sandand shingle b€ach-nesting species (e.8. Buick &Paton]988). The prcsence of dogs increases fierisks of distubance and depredation of e8gs andyoung (e.3. Keller 1991a, Yalden & Yalden1990).Again, it has been demonstrated that most sportshave the potential to produce effects such as theseand managers generally prc\rent or restrict access

to particular sites where the bird interest issignficant.

A related ploblem is that the presence of people( including research scientists and birdwatchers)may unwiuingly dmw the attention of prcdatomto breeding bnds - Fedators athacted by the alarm

We have shown that a great variety of factors af-fect the de$ee of effect of a given source of distur-ban.e Ci! en lhc aclnoB ledged c.rmpln arions. tit possible to discem clear distuftance effects andto use these examples to guide us to sound man-a8emenl decFionsl The answer lo lhi. que+ion tyes because several recent ca.se studies proyideexcellent examples of research aimed at providinggood management inf omation.It is clear that human presence can force incubat-ing birds ofi nests so risking hatching failure ifeggs cool too much. It can also sepaEte adultslrom lree-rar girg l o ung - cslPcidlly d problpm in

HOW RECPE,AT/ON AFFECTS WAIERE/RDS

behaviour of pareflt birds, by litter or Iood waste.Such indirect effects of recreation Iacilitatingincreased predaiion rates - may in fact be animportant problem (e.9. Titus & van Druff 1981,Keller 1989, Yalden & Yalden 1990) but is on€ thathas not been extensively res€aiched. Clearlymanagers must Srard against such indirectimpacts, especially where predators/ people and

As in surnmer some assessments of winter disflrr-bance have resulted in the bannin& rest ction ornon-establishmmt of paticular reoeational activi-ties in important wedand areas. Available studiesshow that winter disturbance may frequentlycarlse displacement, either between or within sites,or rnay inflrcnce feeding and resting behaviour. Itshould b€ noted tllat such movements perhaps dono ham to waterbirds, wllich are intinsicallymobile anirnals. Indeed there is no evidence thatdisplacement is harrnJul at the population levelbut cetainly may move birds away {rom wherethey wjsh to s€ttle.

Research has demonstuated negative effects onwinter bird numbers and densities from sportssuch as wildfowlin& anBIinS (including bait col-lection),,ind-$rfin&boating?lc. Somehaveconcluded such displacement to have had limitedimpact because birds simply move to use 'adia-cent' areas. However, hi,Ih quality, unpolluted,rclatively safe and undistubed stagin& winter-ing or breeding sites may often be in short $pplyin a given region. Al.o. iI a given p.pulari.n is

relatively abundant it is reasonable to assume dlata[ high quality sites will be occupied and the ardval of fur$er birds to these areas Inay increaseinte elmce lretween them (ee. Zwaislg7z7,eeerc1973; Coss-Custard 1985, 1993; Goss-Custard cfdl. 1995a&b). The assessment of potential impacts

of disturbance to waterbhd popu lations at a giverlsite must clearly tale account of the likely avail-ability of altemaiive sites within reasonable ttav-elling distance for th€ btuds. Altematives are becoming fer er. ber au"e many weildnd" continueto be lost to development or drainage.

Relatively Iew studies have included considera-tion of disturbance on energy budgets, though theresultant increase in energy expenditurc rnay beapFeciable:

. 21% increase in daiy maila.d energy requiremenis be-

cause or dhtulbance ellecls (Watmoush 1983)

. 3l!6 in(rease for disrr,bad bre1. geese (Whi.p Foolsor1982).

. 11% increase ior d sturb€d brenl geese, atrd excepuonally

37% (Ridd n9ton er a/. 1996).

. a potental increase oi 20-50% n walerbnds on busy days

for recreailon {Plalleeuw & Henkens 1998b).

It is impoitant to place the inleased energy de-mands within $e context of daily eners/ bud gets.

For example, Watmough's duck spent most of theday loaling and so the inqease in enerSy expendi-ture was udikely to have an ovemll efiect. lndeedthe allthor ar8ued that the birds wolrld be unlikelyto stay within the area iJ they {ailed to attain thenecessary energy balance at the site.

A bird's ability to compensate for disturbance, byextended periods of feeding, increased feedingrates or ftrough finding very profitable food-riclpatches js also important. DependinS on the lev-els of energetic costs of particular disturbances,the dmation o{ disturbance and the feeding stat-egy of the speciet it is knovm that some compen-sation can indeed occur (Madsen & Fox 1995). Inone study, wigeon spent most of their time forag-ing and were unable to compensate for lost feed-in8 time (Madsen ct dl. 1992). By comparison, muteswans spent less time foraging and compensat€dfor the lost {eeding time within the same day. Birdsmay also compensate by intensifying the {eedingeffort (e-& Swermen ef d. 1989), moving elsewhere(\4&ite-Robinsonl9SZGoss-Custard&Verboven'l 993, Stock 1 993) or feeding more at other times,for example at night (Tamistet 7974,-1976; Ower.& Wiliams 1976; Goss-Custard & Ve$oven 1993).

Visual-{eedeE or intertidal feeders with restrictedfeeding opportunity, however, may be unable tofeed nocturnaly and thus compensate for daltimedisturbance- Further, inireasing the need to feed

HOW RECREAT|ON AFFECTS WATaRS/AOS

6l

52

under the cover o{ darkness may increase preda-tion risk (e.9. for grazing wildJowl), dlough notwhere predation is mai y by diumal predators.

An important point is that rcoeational disturbanceis o{ten indiscdminate in terns oI the watefuirdspecies affected, as well as affecting different spe-cies to differing degrees. In wildJowlin& for exam-ple, l€itimate quarry species often share their habi-tats with lare protected species and these may beaffected throuSh disturbance. Reaction distancestudies have shown some species to be more sen-sitive to r€crcational disturbance while others mayhabituate. Site management therefore needs to betdrlored lo lhe need5ot lhe mosl !pn\ilr\p5pecie)ff birds do not habituate, and especially if theyshow a heightened response to disturbance, thmthe site will have a lowered 'carrying capaciry'and suppoft fewer birds. Altenatively, the birdspresent will be in relatively poor condition andeither factor may potentially reduc€ overall popu-laiion "ize Wherea<d desirdble popularionsr,,eis a subjective measurq it is likely that, owing tohabitat loss, ma]Iy waterbird populations are arlower than their histodcal levels.

The effects of disturbance do not always seem torelate closely to the intensitr, oI rccreational activ-ity at particular sites. lt would be a mistake, rhere-Iore, to thinl that low numbers of sportsmen (e.g.

witdfowlers, water skiers efc.) are somehow un-likely to disturb birds nor n€cessarily that highnumbe$ will cause unacceptable disturbance. Asan example, Ko$chgen & Dal gren (1992) notedthat over 2F00 tundra swans were caused to leav€their most important {eeding area on the upperMissis+pi River by the presence of two smallboats. Other aspects of the activity are also impor,tanL sucl as the pattem of sports movemmts inrelation to the position of wate owl flocks.

It is impotant to recognise that waterbirds are notequally vulnemble to recreational disturbance atall times o{ the year- Most wate$irds experiencecner8etic boH Iene( l. J L .ome slage uf Lheu- []e.y-de. There are periods when tlley might be expectedto be especially sensitive to disturbance, such aswhm breeding, modting, on migratiorr in mid-winter, or in times o{ poor weather and/or lowfood availability. k follows that excessive distur-bance under these circu$tances may have par-ticlrlarly severe consequences for waierbirds andmanagement agencies should strive to enhance theprotection afforded to the birds at these times. De-spite the likely importance oI studies in these

HOW RECP€AT|ON AFFECTS WATERR/RDS

stesstul pe ods, there have been relatively fewdisturbance studies undetaken during the llight-less moul! on migation or during severc weatherperiods.

Overall, disturbance ellects may be widespreadand whilst we generally do not know whetherth€re arc population-level impacrs, local effectsmay clearly often be substantial- But which typesof disturbance are the worse for waterbids? Thissemls to depend on whom you ask and how youphrase the questions, illushated nicely by tlle studyof Bell & Owen (1990) (Box 4.23). Furth€more,whilst there are some studies with comparativedata for several forms of reffeational activiry (e.g.

Tuit€ zf al. 1984, Burger 1986 Belanger & Bedard1989, KLby eI al. 1993, Koolluas et rl. 1993. Smit &Visser 1993, Stock 19%), these shrdies are nor geo-

Sraphically extensive enou8h to allow ovef,al gen-eralizations rcgarding the disturbance mrking ofparticular sports. In any case it would be u]lpro-durtiveLopur.ue dnswerlothi\querLionsh.eall recrcational activities have demonstrated po-tential to adversely affect the waterbirdpopulations of individual wettand sites-

4.4 Habitat inftuenc€s and competition

Habitats thoughout a species' ran8e are able rosupport an upper Iimit on numbers: the so-called'carrying capaciq,/. This level of occupancy willv.rv From vedr lo yed-r with prevailing cnviron-mental conditions but continues to constrain nun-bers to a brcad upper threshold. Habitar daxugeand loss lowers this threshold, often pemanentt,resulting in a reduced carrying capacity for thespecies. Recreational activity, or habitat manage-ment for reoeation, may indiectly affect warerbirdsif the quantity or qualities o{ waterbtud habitatsare reduced or enlulrced.

a-4 I t h! r,,tlcction dal u* ot bait Jar rtlptia!

Anglers either buy bait from Iishing suppliers orcollect it themselves, with bait collection beinS es-pecially prevalent in coastal areas. Consexvation-ists have sometimes beer concemed that bait-rot-lecting activity may be damaging to wildlife andthis has provided the stimdation for a number ofovewiews (e.9. Fowlff 1992, Huggeu 1992) andd etailed research studies.Studies in coastal areas have focused on the col-lection of Gabs, lu8worm and raSworm for seaanSling, the associated distuibance effects (see

section 5.4.2) and possible reductions of food sup-

plies or habitat quality (Box 4.24). The rcsearchshows that local patches of crabs or worms maybe supgessed ttuough harvestin& but lonSer-temeffccts seem udikely.

For angling in freshwaters, bait is generally pur-chas€d {rom shops arld as well as being used onthe hook it is oftm added in large quantities to thewaler lo alrracl number. of fi,h lo lhe drea beingworked. There has bem concem ttlat such'groundbaiting' mJy be d.lmdging. allerinS lhp.omp.i-tion oI invertebmte communities or triggeringalgal blooms

Sucheffectshavebeenthefocuso{or yafewstud-ies in Britain (Box 4.25) and the conclusions havebeen contadictory. Overall, where coarse anglersground bait naturally unpoductive stillwaters,there is prcbably the potential for a modest degreeof nutrimt emichment to take place. However, mostintmsive ground-baitingprogrammesareunder-taken on productive lowland lakes where thereare high densities of bottom-Ieeding fish such as

,:arp, bream and tenctr- In dtse situations it is likelythat most o{ the grolrrld-bait will be €at€n by thetuh in a short enough period o{ time to redme de-oxygenating effects and impacts on benthic fauna.It is quite conceivable, given the good evidence ofthe ability of bottom-feeding flsh to depleie t enthicinveltebrate standing stocks (scction 4.4.2), that

ground-bait may act as a h1ff€r, protecting someinverteb,rates from intensive sullllner Fedation byfish. A final point is that that waterfowl includingswans, coot, tuJted duck and mallard are seen eat-ing angler's Sround bait. This may represmt animpotant food souce fol such birds as well as Ior{ish living in the same habitats.

1.4.2 Fish stocking a d fish-watctbnd

Fish are often stocked Ior angling purposes b€ca11se

high fish densities incr€ase the chances of a .atch-There is concem, however, that a high fish densitymay impact adveEely on wedand habitats, withpossible consequences for rvaterbirds. In Bdtain,{or example, the current trend on many co mer-cial coarse {ished€s is to increase stock densitiesespecially of cornmon carp, which offer ligh lev-cl. ol dnSIinS pcrformin(e Van) such fi.hprip"are especially conshucted Ior the purpose, poseno threat to important waterbird habitat, and arelegitimate enterp ses. However, the pmctice o{heavy stocking on oth€r waters, as curently con-templated, includes some large public watey sup-ply resenoirs that may have substantial winter-ing wate owl populations, which could be adversely affected by lowered aquatic plant and invertebmte availability.

There is a good body oI research to show that ad-equate supplies of aquatic invertebrates are animportant component oI waterbird habitat qual-ity. This is nicely ilustated by studies undertakenIor ducks (Box 4.26) where invertebnte abundanceis key io obtaining good reproductive success and

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WA.ERR|PDS

53

64

detemining both breeding and wintering site lo-catioDs. This may equally apply to other wat€$irdspeci€s.

Similarly there is much research to show that fishare strongly associated with dch invertebrate com-munities, which th€mselves are Iundarnentallyaffe,'terl by dre presence of fish (Box 4.24. It js wortllnoting that these examples cover seveml fish andwetland types and although the fish have some-times been stocked at higher than natural leveltsom€ commercial coaBe fisheries operate aroundthis density, with considerable implications Iorinvertehates. Such marked food chain impactsmrst have signilicant knock-on eflects IorsymPatric wate owl, and there are marly studiesto show this indeed to be the case (Box 4.28).

Fish can affect the gowth of aquatic plants also,through consumption of plants or seeds, by uprooting or by promoting the Srowth of dense shading phytoplankton populations due to nutrientcycling in the aquatic system. For examplL', caryand bream dig up and turn over lalebed sedimentsvigorously in their search for burowing inverte-brate prey. In the process they have a direct impacton submerged aquatic macrophyte Srowth- Theyuproot geminating seedlings a]ld yolrng plantsand increase the suspended sediment load in thewaier column, so rL'cycling algal nuh.ientr andcutting out light p!'netration to plants on thelakebed. This increased turbidity can lead to al-gal-bloom dominated primary production sys-tems, rather than clear-watercd macophyte com-munities where light penetrates to the lakebed. Fish

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERA/RDS

55

can also re-cycle plant nutri€nts {rom thesediments whilst rooting and tlrou8h excretionof digeshve products which can have a substan-tial (e.S. ca50%)inputto the phosphorus loadingof a lake and thus a direct influence on plantgro*th (La]nalra 1 975).

Examples of studies demonstrating such eflectsare provided in Box 4.29. It is also possible thatpredation by tuh on snails and other invertebrateswhich graze the periphyton (the microbial community coating tirc leaves and sterns o{ submerSedriainophyteE could lead tir a deueas€ inw€ed beds

due to'smothedng' by the epiphytic community.This, however, has yet to tle ade+lately research€d.

Many of the effects discussed here are rrtural tomany lakes but can be induced or exaggeratedthrough t1le deliberate stocking oI fish by man.Clead, both ftom a waterbird conservation perspechve and an environmenlall) .ound (i.herip-

managemmt standpoint, the best fisheries are bal-anced self-sustaining fish communities which donot impose excessive impacts on aquatic plant orinvedebnte communities.

4.1.3 Watetbiftl rcledse! d d competition with

J11st as angler's stock waters to maximise theircatd! wildlowlers have introdllced species sr1ch

as malard and Canada geese to flew areas andhave added fam-reared birds to supplement na-tive wildfowl populations. Such practrces mayhave adverse implications both for nativewate$kds and their habitats, with concems abo11t

inlcrbrceding (/.p. lo". of 8enctn intPtrirv). in-creased comprtirion for rp-our, e5, hJbilJl deLerioration and the spread of disease (see CallaShan et

a|.1995,D9n.

Existing research reinforces the concem aborthyb ridi\d horL wilh e\ample. of gm$ic cro.ion ina number of populations through interbreedingwith mallard (Box 4.30). Howev!, whilst the otherpnrblems are genuine area" of conLem. there i,little research to detemine the scale and signifi-cance of the ploblems.lprhdp- the most well pubUcsed cr.econL mingbirds is t}rc escape o{ the North American ruddyduck from captivity at Slimbridge and the buildup ola wild potularion in Brirdin in rhe lollowinI

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERR|RO5

55

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERE/R,'S

d€cad€s. The species spread to many count esofEuope from the 1980s onwards and hybrids be-tween the ruddy and the endangered white-headed duck on its Spanish breeding groundswere reported inthe 1990s. The hybndisationwasconsidered so serious that it tkeatened the white-head€d duck s erdstence as a sepante sp€cies andmeasures have since been taken in Spain and Brit-ain to tly and eliminate the prcblem by .ontrollingthe ruddy duck and shootinS hyb ds (Hughes &Grussu 1995). M€€tings were held at national andInternational level and research initiated into thefeasibility oI control in 1992. This concluded thatcontlol was possible and a regional control tialin 1999-2002 managed to reduce the ruddy duckpopulations by 65% in one area and 93% in an-other. The study concluded that the popdationnationally in the UK could be rcduced to less than5% of curent levels (less than 175 birds) within 4lo 5 years fB. Hughes pers. cornnr.). The de.i.ionwas taken in 2003 io undertake national control.

1-4.1 Boat use, ||ash and associated pollutio

Uddle & ftor8ie (1980) explain how the force gen-erated to push a boat forward is dissipated withinthe surounding water body creating bow-wavesand attendant wash that can cause physical dam-age to marginal vegetation and banls. \,Vhen a boatpasses, the water level at the bank tust fises, thenfalls sharply and linally is washed by a series ofwaves. Cleaiy, the floating nest of a waterbildwould be subjected to a 'roller-coaster ride' withpotentially disashous results.

Boal. don'l have tobepowered in ordcr to elfedwetland habitats. Canoeing activity, Ior example,can result in localised damage to barkside vegeta-tion at launchint points, damage to littoml reedbeds on regular paddling routes, localised modfi-cation of the stream bed and occasional distur-bance to spawning fish and nesting watedowl(Sidaway 1994).

These, plus effects such as pollution fromcombusted fuel and o4 turbidity due to silt suspensio& choppin8 up water plants with Fopellels and bank ercsion/water plant darrage by boatwash are also associated with powered boat ac-

rivilv. includinS water skiing (Liddle & Scorgie1980i CEED 1993, Land Use Consultants 1994).

On canals, the quantib/ o{ aquatic vegetation hasbeer shown to be negatively associated with boattraffic and rnajor ve8etation losses occur at highboat taIfic levels (Murphy et al. 1995). Cleaiy,

heavily rced waterways offer poor waterbird habi-tats due to aquatic vegetation damage and a con-sequential lack ofnesting and brood rcarin8habi-tats. Lighter boat ta{{ic ca& however, sllppresssome common invasive aquatic plant species (see

Muryhy etal. 1995).

Liddle & Scorgie (1980) discuss the potential foreuuophication from se'wage discharged dir€ctlyfrom boats, thouSh this Factice js now ilegal. Theyalso consider po[11tion from outboard motors and

Fovide a surpdsing estimate that the total hydro-. arbon d tchirge From d .in 8le o u r boa rd en gi nerunning {or one day would be equivalent to thesewage produced by 400 people, assuming thatthe products contain 85% degradable carbon.Murphy et al. (1995) conclude that, genemlly, pol-lution ftom boat moto$ is likely only to have localeffects. Loch Lomond, however, rcceives an esti-mated 10 tonne( ol h\ dro. drbon. ajlnudlly rrom

Powerboats, and slrmrner water samples talen af-ter heal/ powerboat activity revealed hydrocar-bon concentrations above theoretical sa{ety limitsat two outolthree sites (Ballllan eta1.1995).Ckal]y,there is potential for aquatic polution ftom inter-nal combustion engines and other sources but fewstudies to suggest whether the potmtial is oftenrealised.

1.4.5 Wetland managene t for spart

Wetlands are sometimes actively rnana8ed so thatthey are enhanced for spon. Though a[ .t rater-based spots will involve at least some wetlandrnanagement, aftention so {ar has focused on habi-tat management by anSling and wildfowling8ro11ps.

In freshwate$, wetland vegetation is somelimescut back or removed to {acilitate access for fishinga]ld sailing and to avoid tackle entanglement.However, wetland conseruation managers mayoften wish to maximise feeding nesting and coverhabitats Ior waterbirds or conversely to createopen water lor wintering waterbird flocks. Rec-rcational and consewation endpoints may some-times differ in terms of prefe ed botanical com-

Tracks and pathways are sometimes wom by an-glerc through pa an Brasslands, often with a

considerable loss of rouBh grass and reed habi-tats. Phngfiites a]rLd PhalaTls beds tend to suJfermore ihan lower-growing tougher species sucl asanl,r "pd8e-, 4g/o.',- rnd tor Sra.- -pe.res

HOW RECREA ON AFFECTS WATERBIRD'

57

58

(Mulphy & Pearce 1984. The Dartington Amen,ity Research Trust (1973) {ound that coarse fishermen used a $avel pit shoreline at a mtc of 33.3anglers per 100m oI bark per weelt causing 26%

of the bank to be worn bare. lt is worth noting that,at most sites, anglers are not totally to blame forthese effects. For instance, Sukopp (1971), study-ing an intensively 11sed Cerman dver shorcline,di.covered lhal whil"t the n, h h) droserdl boldni-cal community was often eroded back to bareground, much of the darnage was done by the highdensity of bathe6, boaters and swimmers-

Much of t}e dctj\ e control of aquati. plant\ involves hand or mechanical cutting of bank sideand underwater stands o{ aquatic vegetation. Forriparian nesting a]ld tue waterbird species grass,reed and rush cutting in summer is most damaS-int to nesting birds. Chemical contol is also

widely pactised and it is imperative that the ap-prop ate products are used in thc correct way iJdamage to the aquatic environment is to beavoided. The Ministry oI Agriculhfe, Fisheies andIood guidelines must always be followed (MAFIlooq). \4ar\ aqudh( mvFrtebrales arc \ ery spnsi-tive to herbicides and consi.lerable ham can bedone through misapplications of these products.Conversely, wherc appropdaiely applied, chemi-cals on the MAAF (DEFRA) safe list can be verysafe and useful {or cleadng invasive plant $owth.Lewis & Williams (1984), Seagrave (1988) andRSPB/NRA/RSNC (1994) Fovide sound adviceon aquatic plant management.

Fisheries managers often create new wetlands andare constantly managing eyjsting ones to optimise{ishery performance. l\4ren such management,including habitat restoration techniques, is aimedat the promotion o{ self-sustaining native Iishstocks, then the overall impact on conseFation isgenerally positive (Giles & Summerc 1996). Iur-thermore, angling does a great deal to {inance andimplement positive wetland provision a]ld pro-tec'tio& benefiting waterbirds as part oI the aquaticsystem- For o(ample, angleE have b€en at the {orc-{ront o{ addressing important issues such as physi-cal habitat change (deep-dredgin& flood delenceprqech), prcdation by mink, and wetland acidifi.catiorL thus helping to Ploted habitat for all wild-life living in wetland environments.

Since wildfowling is a primary activiq/ in wetlandsthrouShout the world, wetland management {orhunting is primadly geared to provide an abun-dance of appropdate Iood, open water for r€stinga]ld optimal nesting conditions. Smith er l]1. (1989)

provide many examples oI the tlPe of habitat modi-fication (or enhancement) practices employed.Managemmt cornmonly includes the manipula-tion of hydrology, with resultant changes to veg-etation and invertebmte communities (refercncesin Calaghan er dl. 1995, 1997) and o{ter the vir-tual extfupation of fish (Wefler 1978). B€cause ofcompetition with wate owl (section4.4.2), fish areo{ten considered undesirable in wetlands man-aged {or waterfowl, and where draw-downs arenot possible, other measures ar€ often takm to re-duce fish biomass, for example through the application oI pesticides (r.8. rotenone) or by hawling

i (Kadlec & Smith 1992, N. Gilcs, rmpubl.). Ihe effect

3 of sucl activities is site depmdent but tends to3, result in marked changes to plant and anirnal com-+ murities (discussed by Cal[a?ha].r"t aL 1995,19E4.

Further, large beds of tall emergent vegetation rnayPoor sgning qealed a 'shod-cuf aong flris riveEide foohalh.

HOW RECREAT|ON,4FFFCTS WATERR/RDS

be removed to increase the area of open water, of-ten involving the use of herbicides (e.8. dalaponand gl,"hosate), sometimes repeatedly (Newbold1975, Thomas 1982, Kadlec & Smith 1992). Bum-ing is also commonly used to rcduce th€ area oftall emergentvegetation, as js grazing- Whilst thereis no doubt ihat wetland marragement for hlrntingimpacts on non-target species and on wetlandbiodiveEity in general, there appears to have bee.n

no studies that have cfitically evaluated these top-ics (Callaghan et al. 1995, 1997).

The value-added incentive placed uponwetlandsvia recreational wate owl hunting drives manyhabitat management, restomtion and Fotectionprcgrammes. For example, it has been estimatedthat 40 miflion heclares o{ wedand habitat in NoithAmerica have been protected as a direct result ofwaterlowl hunting gleitmeyer er al- 1993). In Eu-rope a1so, habitat restoration is a core prograflnreoI some hunting organizations (Mcolle 1995; Laws& Lecocq 1996, Laws 1994. Aldrcugh there seems

to have been no cdtical analyses o{ thes€ activi-ties, the inlroduction of the concept o{'wise use'into watefowl hunting and its acceptance by or-ganised hunting goups has t een a major step {or-waid and the management of habitats by huntinggroups olIer substantial benefits to wetlandbiodiversity.

As with angling concems, the managers of sitesused for wildfowling have long practised preda-tor control in an attempt to increase nesting suc-cess. Studieshave shol mthat wher€ predator den-sities are reduced substantial, waterfowl produc-tion can be inoeased in certain areas (Balser ei a/.

1968; Duebbert & Kantud 1974, Duebbert &Lokemom 1980, Greenwood 1986). This, plus theprovision of nest boxes and pladorms {or water-fowl, would certaiiy bdng benefits Ior non-quarywaterbirds as well.

1.4.6 The sis ificd ce ol hobitdt inlluences dnd

It is dear from the studies summarised that r€.ra-tion, in its various forms, can luve important c()n-sequences for waterbird food supplies and habi-tats. The indirect effects and impacts of anglinghave bem the focus of much attention and it hasbeen shorvn that the collection oI bait in intextidalareas may result in reduced local populations ofinvextebrates (waterbird food$, which are replen-ished over tim€. Despite the short-tem nature ofthis prcblem, the impact has been judged to be se-

vere in areas with intemationally impotant birdpopulations, and banning o{ bait coll€ction hasoccured. On rccky shorer the collection of .rabsfor bait must alfect intetidal aninlals and plantsto some degree, but impacts on waterbirdpopulations seems unlikely. The evidence of dam-age to waterbirds ftom the use of &round baits in{reshwaters is inconclusive. Again this secms unlikelytobeamajorproblem{orwaterb ds,thougha consid€ration is needed at sites of high impor-tdnce for wdterbird- or other wetldnd B ildlife

By contrast, it is certain that invertebrates andaquatic plants are ftmdammtally impotant towaterbirds, that fish populatiofls c.ul sever€ly de-press oi alter invertebrate or plant communities,and that this can have adverse impacts onwatefiirds ftrough lowered rcproductive ccess

and rcduced carrying capacities. Thus, there canbe real impacts from {ish stocking on localwaterbird populations where high fish densitiescoincidp with imporldnl breeding or winlcringwaterbird populations. In these circumsiarues selfsustaining fish corrununities are desirable, whichdo not impose excessive impacts on aquatic plantor invertebrate communities-

I rom d walerbrd lood dnd hdbilal poml ot \ ier.the use o{ boats on wedands is not ftee from prol}lems. On wetlands with high levels of boat traffic,previous rcsearch has shown a]l impact in termsof major veg!,tation loss. Indeed some intensivelyused waterways are devoi.{ of bankside andaquatic vegetation and suffer ctuonic bank ero-sion, leading to turbid watels. Though not estab-lished with cetainty, there may also be local pol-lutiry effects {rom engines and sewags with con-sequences for waterbird foods. Clearly, heavilyused waterways offer poor wateftird habitats dueto aquatic vegetation damage and a consequentiallack of nesting and b{ood-rearing habitats.

R€lea.seandstockingo{wate owlforhlmtinghaveestablished populations of introduced species overIargcparN of the !rorld. and conrinup to do "o mparts of Europe. Intoductions have inevitablycaused altelations to the struct e of nativcwaterbird communities, and havc caused sLrbstan

tial erosion of the genetic integrity of five watc'r-{owl taxa, and *re survival of at least three of iheseseems udikely i{ preseni trends continue. Thereseems little doubt that the stocking of game-farmmaltards for hunfing has had a prcIound eflect onthe autecology of this species. There rnay also bedisease implications arising Irom these releases

HOW RECREAT/AN AFFECTS WATERB|RA5

59

70

and stocking but the siSnificance o{ this for nativewatcrbirds, and the possible bmader effects onecosystem sbuctureremain un-researched.

The management of wetlands io facilitaie re!'rea-tio& for example Eshing and wildfowling oppor-tunity, may include undesirable actiwities forwaterbirds and coMict with the aspirations ofconseft ationists. Insmsitiv€ activities lllay includethe introduction of an altered hydrology, removalor loss of w€'tland vegetahon, removal or intoduc-tion of fish, excessive erosion anLl inappropriat€use oI chemicals- However the involvement of an-glers and wildfowlerc in wetland management canbring enomrous benefits in terms of sitc protec-tio& management and restomtion, and the con-trol o{ prcdators and alien intoductions.

4.5 Overatt strength oI effects and impacts ofrecreation on waterbirdE

We would like to emphasise in this sul nary theimportant sections in the Iorgoing account, espe-

cially sections 4.2.5,4.3.9 and 4.4.6.

Most studies of the effects and impacts of recrea-tion have concluded widl an assessment of therclative sevedg/ oI $e observed inllumces. Mads€n

cf dl. (1998a), {or example, provide an interestingsummary of the degree of eff€ct of different fomsof recreation on mute sv/an, wigeon and coot intwo Danish wetlands (Box a.31). Here the combi-nation of temporal, spatial and dilfnal overlapspinpoints fishin& shooting from mobile punts andshooting {rcm stationaiy punts as the potentialdisturbance sources. Judging liom behaviouml

effects, shooting from mobile punts ranks as themost distuabing activity becausc it ca[sed the long-est disruplion to feeding. These, and the concl11-

sions drawn lrom other studies, are site-spe!ficand it is extremely difficult to generalise about rec-realional effects on waterbirds givm the speciJicnahrre of many stu dies, the often-conJlicting con-clusions they draw and the fragmented nature ofthe inJormation available.

Despite fiis, we attempt to sumarise the slrmgtho{ the evidence for ellects and impacts onr aterbllds from dittercnt tom5 oI re.rearil'n i n

Box 4.32. Overall, it is clear that many activitiesha\ e demon"ralcd polenrial to caucc rpdu.lion.in waterbird numbe$, dmsitres or reduced heed-ing performance at individual sites or clusters ofsites. This is a Iundamentally impoftant efecf ofreseation because it me3ns that the value of a site,trom J h dlerbird dnd biudr\ ersity poinl of \ iew. i'lowered on account of recreational activity. Thisrnay be unacceptable where nature conservatlonshould take precedence, and may also be unwel-come at other sites because people generally areinterested in obselving wildliJe on their 'ownpatch , suggestinB that managerc should strive tomaintain or establish wildlife interests even orrwetlands used Ior sport. Of the recreational activi-ties producinS site based or rcgonal effects, ex-cessive fish-waterbird interactions and mortalityfrom inSest€d lead (from angling and wildfowling)appear s€rious enouSh to impd.f on localpopulations, reducing breeding output and/orsuIvival. Of all rcoeational activities, wildJowlingis perhaps the oflly sport that may inpac, onwaterbirds at the population level, and above a

HOW RFCPFAflON AFFECfS WATERR/RDS

71

threshold level, shooting harvests may placewaterbhd populations in j!'opardy. There is alsothe associated stocking and intoduction of birds{or hunting purposes which may be responsiblefor the loss of genetic integig/ amongst a restdctednumber of waterbird populations.

AllhouSh we have oullined lhe potential tor im-pacts of water-based spot and recreation andgven examples where there have been conflicts,in genenl the sensitive management of water ar-eas and re!'reational activities has resl ted in thenumlrers oI most waterbird species increasint atthe same time as r€oeational activity was becom-ing more mtensive. \4an) sporting orgdnisd L'ons

have been very active in promoting sustainabilityin their spot so that it can co-exist with healthy

4.6 Limitations of tha 3cienae andguid.nce for th€ luture

Many studies have taken a rcst cted view ol rec-reational activity and focused on one particularIorm of recreation. Indeed, anglin& wildfowlingan4 to a lesser extent sailing have been the focrsoI much of the rcsearch conducted to date. In moststudies of disturbance ihe controlled stimlllus elic-iting escape flight is human approach- The pres-ence of human activity denies access to resources

(be it for loaJin& sleeping, I€€din& moulting orheedinS) and reduces the level of resource use tobelow what would be attainable in the absence o{such activity. In this contexL it is important to re-alis€ that there is a multitude of recreational ac-

tivities in many wetland areas, and the effects ofmultiple di5lurbdn(e from dilterent lource. is

likely to hav€ a synergistic or cumulative effect onbirds. However, there are rca]ly very few studiesthat have adequately quantified the intensities,dist butiorr phenology, diumal patterns, andhence the potential eff€cts on waterbirds, of thevaious human activities operating together in ar-eas rced by waterbirds. Very few studies have ex-pedmentally demonstrated the strength o{ re-sponse to djstubance by, for example, contlolledremoval of one or more a.tiviries from a sire

A further limitation is $at it is necessary, but dif-Iicult, to define what constitut€s the site, loca1, re-

&ional. nationaldnd n}1vav populdrion ot a Srvcnspecies (tlill ei al. 1997a). This has rarely been done.Re"ed r.h nepd- Lo addrec,lh. {p.rtidl s( dlc ot nn-pact, relatively easy at the site level but very diffi-cult Ior whole fl},.ways. Site effects can give a loca limprcssion of severe disturbance impacts from agiven activity (?.8. NCC/RSPB 1988). However itis often possible that $e overall fl),.way popula-tion can absorb many local effects on conditionand sulvival of individual birds whi Ist experienc

HOW RECPEAT|ON AFFECTS WATERE|RDS

72

ing little or no ov€rail impact on the larger scale-

There is also th€ need to address more of the'bigpicture'. Local and regional sub-.populations ofwaterbirds interact and combine to constitute a

global 'metapopulation'. This is the natural re-source provided by a Siven species. Understand-ing how changes in habitat availability and rec-r€ational prcssures affect or impact waterbirdpopulations is a very important subject area forrcsearch developmert. At Fesent this is being tack-led on a coarse-scale through the provision of keysite p(otectlon on the major flyways- Much moreapplied research is needed before wc can undcr-stand how important each site is and where 'pres-sure points' for differert spedes occur on theirfl)'ways.

Obserations $at suggest that waterbirds are dis-placed by reffeational activiq/ from a particularsite are now common in the research literature.However it is apparent that much of the infoma-tion available on the effects/impacts of dislurbanceon waterbirds is noi based on causal scienhficanalysis. Therefore, it is often impossible to knowthe extent of an effcct- or wh€ther it constiLutes a

rp.rl populari.n impact in any given situarion.

Tlere is clearly a need for more controlled experi-mLrtrl nudre. lhdl help lo e.labli.h unambigx-ous cause and effert relationships. Experimentalevidence is also needed to show that the displace-ment is not due to other, confounding facto$, forp\dmfle rhdnge. in habitat qualit) of.itc, or inoverall population sizes (see Madsen ef ,/. 1998b).It is also the case that displacemcnt as a rcsult ofdisturbance may only be temporary (e.8. O!,r'ens

1974 and thus may not have a long-te1m negarlveeff€ct. Furthemore, it is important to know howmany birds would use a site in the absence of dis-turbance to assess the lull extent of any disturbance event. Gill el rl. (1996) arSue very cogentlythai it is important to understand the pattem o{resource use in a given area be{ore overlaying thetufluence of disturbance (see Box 4.33). This h^c

mrely been achieved in studies of recreational im-pacts ({or €xceptions see Madsen ?t l?l- 1998a,biPlatt€euw & Henkens 1998a). Many of these as

p€cts have oftm not b!'!'n addressed adequately inthe research studies so Iar.O\erall. thes, ient h quJiL) mdudresottheintemctions between watefinds and rcffeational ac-

tivities is questionable. This is nicely illustratedb\ Hillpl ri. { laaZ. t^ ho devcloped $e fouoh m8.

HOW RECREAT/ON AFFECTS WATERA/ROS

declining scale o{ scientfic riSour for disiurbance

. use ol expermenia contro, a before and aner sludy study

wlh and wilhout disturbance.

. more than lwo aieas sludied al the same rme wilh known

eve s or a qrad enr oi d srurbance being investlgated

. a co elalive sludy, mu Ii-sile or mu t.years

. a study based on s mple observat on, ollen nvo v ng no

They showed fiat oI 153 studies reviewed only 20used an expeiment with a contuol, or were con-ducted under a protocol ushg a beforc-and-afterpI wi$-and-wiihout disturbance manipulation. Of

fte studies consid€red,54% rclied on simple ob-servations, often without iesting any speciJi. hy-pothesis. Further, the majodty of EnvironmentalStatements and Environmental Impact Assess-ments faiied to address bird conser-\,ation satis-factorily and often misapplied suvey teclmiques\o dr ro pruJJl,F utuound dd.a (Bo\ 4. \4). lhi. i-ndi.ativc .f a r,ldu\ plv noor \ran\idrd

^t .cir1-

tific rigour in disturbance studies, a situation thatseerns applicable to studies of waterbirds and rec-reation as a whole. Cearly an overall goal shoul.lbe to improve the science available to suppoftmanaSement decisions.

73

HOW RFCRFA ON AFFFCTS WATFPR/RDE

5. MANAGEMENT FOR RECREATION ANDWATERBI RD CONSERVATION

71

5, t lntroduclion

The ailn of this handbook is to h+ optimise ther€creational and wildli{e value of wetlands with-ou I comnronxsmS lhc abiliD of tu rUJe gcne!drion.to turther develop and enjoy these benefits. Suchlong-term integration is what we consider to be"sustainabl€ development". But as descibed inthe previous chapter, recreation and waterbirdinlere.F oflen.onflict and ulrimatell r ompromisethe value of a site for both or either. Hence, man-agement is necessary to aleviate conflict and max-imise the value oI a site {or both interests as mucha. pos\ible This tast isdis.u..ed undFrh\omaintopics:

. manaSemenl framework and process (wh ch describes

waielbnd conseryalion po iics and po cies nlegraled plan-

ling dnd Talageaelt,.osi b"1e'ir alalyrF ald "1v'on-menlal impacl assessmenis).

. management lechniques (which desc bes a wide range of

Draclical meihods ihai can be used Io inre0rare recreation

and walerbkd conservalion).

Although the emphasis is on Britain and Europe,the text is of relevance to wetland conseFationalld recrearion world-wide. Case studies are usedto hiShlight panicularly successful or bnovativeapproaches to rnanagement jssues. For {urtlrcr read-ingseeBox5.1.

5. 2 l,tEnEgement lramewoak and procas5

5.2.I Watetbird co seruation rcsponsibilities

There is now an extensive framework of statutesIor both species-based and habitat-based conser-vation relevant to waterbtuds and wetlands in mostdeveloped countries and to an increasing extentin developing countdes. In Britain and Europe,for eMmple, stafutory and non-statutory measruesoperate at a wide variety of scales and address adivenity of issues (Box 5.2). Dom€stic d€signationsdnd leSislaUon Ihdl in.lude sale81'd-ds for miSra-

MANAAEMENT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATFRB/RD

tory wate owl and wetlands often Fovide them€chanism through which intemational conservation measures are delivered. Salath€ (1991) descdbes the temls and implementation of rnany oIthese policies.

Site protectio& through statutory designation, of-tm lies at the heart of any paticular rvaterbird(on.en alion Frameworl Wilh nine .uch dccig-nations, Britain has more iypes than any otherEuopean country, and overall theye are at least 18site-relateL{ conseruation measures that are rel-€vant to the conservation of waterbirds in Britain.These are summarised in Box 5.3 and desc bed inmore detail in Davidson ef ll1. (1991).

The net r€sult is often a complex framework ofpolicies and politics under which managementoperat€s, and this needs to be understood fullybeJore management actions are taken. The follow-in8.ub-ce.tion, dcs( ribe Ln more detail the fnncipal statutory and non-statutory measures rele\anl lo l1(lldnd and waLerbird .onsen rLiofl lnBdtain and EuIope.

5.1. l. I Ram..rCi,n\cnri\'n and Bir,l. Direcrirr

Two intemational agreem€nts provide the coreftamework Ior the cons€rvation of migratorywaterbirds in the East Atlantic Fl),way, the fl),way.f which Brildin lormr a part. ftre lirst ic lie "Con-

vention on Wetlands of Intemationa I ImpotanceEsp€cially as Waterfowl lfubitat", for convenimceusually called the " Ramsar Convention" aJter theIranian town in which it was adopted in 1971. InEC countries, delivery o{ site saJesuard of interna-tional wetland and waterlowl duough tfle RarnsarConventjon hd. bpcn fa. ililaled by lhe rcquirements o{ the "EC Directive on the Cons€Fation ofwild Birds" (Directive EEC/79I409), adopted in1979, and often known as the "Birds Dircctive".

The Ra rnsar Convention requires conhacting par-ties to take steps to stem the prcgressive mcroach-

75

MANAAEMENT FOR RECREAT/AN & WATERA/RO CANSERVAT|ON

ment on and loss oF wetlallds, b promote the wiseuse of wetlands and to identify and list wetlandsoI internaiional importance. The Birds Directiveincludes a number o{ hoad con selvation policies{or maintaining and enlancing naturally occur-rin8 bird populations, including the designationor Spe€ial hotection Areas (SPAS), as well as widercounEyside measures for dispersed species. Member stat€s are required to take special measures Iortwo groups ofbirds: certain listed rare or vulner-able species, and regularly oc(]xr:ring migratory

Regarding recrcatiorr the Birds Directive requiresmemhr states io take accourt of economic andrecreational ne€ds (including hunting) whilstrndmlninins cpe.rec populJtionc ll dl.o rcLtuir,*that pollutio& habitat deterioration and distur-bance to birds should be avoided where iheywould signiJicantly afect survival and reproduc-tion of birds in their area o{ distuibution.

In a linl to the Ramsar Convention, the Birds Di-reclive stresses thai particular attention shall bcpaid to the protection of l^.etlands and, in

Box5.2:Statutofyandnon-statutorymeasuresretevanttothesustainabteuseofwettandsand waterbirds in Britain and Europe tadapted trom srroud. in press)

75

Nalionally prolected sites and

n6ture reseryes, e.g. in Brilain:

Nalional Nature Resdfles (NNRs),

Silos of Special Sdenff. lnlerest

lsssh) Areas of Special Prclection

MANAOEMENT FOR RECREAT/AN & WAT€RA/RD CONSERYAT/ON

National huntingnakinq laws

may further rcstrict lime/mode

oi hunling or quary species(e.9 cold wealher shootins .

Fishery law

Box 5,3; Different types of statutory and non-statutory site-based conservation measures inBritain, inctuding lin itaticsl thetypeofdesignation ltandscape, conservation, heritage)

Typo,ulual.bbreviailon Descriptionand laorl lt.lus

Areir ol Oulslanding Nalural Designated p marily to conserye ihei nalural landscape beaulx .ind io meet tho demandsBdaL y 'AONB,' ol recrea.on ar ,a, a5 s .onsBtenr ,.rt nar.a.njrq rt,e natur.r beaurv and orF,tanosbc'aty undsao, J:es. AoNBs aro de)otuled Lier *e Na.io.a, o;-s o a-.e* l;he cora).id€ A.r' 1949i by ihe Couilrysde Agency in England and 5 nce 1991 by lhe Counlryside

Couru lor {rae! ir WJa,. Thej do rr aopt/,n Sco'Erd. Fe$o1)ibrrir for o.aladminhiraiion oi an AONB ies w Lh toca rurho ti6s al counry, drsnicl or unrlary levet.

AEa gl specisl P@leclioi Designated by ihe Brllish govarnmenl under the.Wildiii€ and Coun!rystde Act 19Bl, trith lhe(AoSP): statutory .onse.%ro, agreeneni of lhe landowner or occupier, aflord n9 slrong proteciion ror padicutar bnd

species throughout lhe year.

Country Park (CP): A local authority designaton under the Countrysde A.t 1968. Couniry pads are designedsla\ulaty landtcapo piimanly for rocrealion and tetsurc, but ofton in aeas oi semi-naiuat habita!.

Ciirnty,Wlidlile_ Irusl resarves Natuid resewds owned teased or managod by the 4g non-statulory wrtdhte trusts, which in(CWJ)i noi-slaiulbry England and Wales gereEtl,/ ea.h covdr a counly or smal q@up oi countes and in Scoiand'cohteryaioa are coveBd by the Scollish Witdliie irust. Wjtdtiie Trusis are pBmoled and Bpresdnied sl

nationaL leveL by d c€nlrat body, rhe u/ dtiie Trusls lformerly RSNC). Some CWr ialurers,e1e5 are aso oarlr, or eno,y,{Nos tranagod or oelal, o rm:e udol aoencies.o ae'e a_e -\Ps Ea.aqed on oet" or.o, a d"rho.!.ps.

77

County Wldli'e Siles Siies designaled by tocal auihorities under their structure ptans - have legst aulhoity(CWS)staiutorycmsetual'b, ihroughplaoninqregulations-

€nvitunmentaili seijsilive Area Deslgnaiod by lhe uK govemmenr under the &ftutrurat Act 1986 ro encourage senstrive(Es_A)i st?tulory carseryai,on iarm g pracl1ces tn areas wher€ lradirronat tamrng has hetped to creare hporlanr witdtite

habilat and atlEbtive tandscap€s, Ior wallands iblabty jn ivei vaileys ahd wet qraistahds.EsAs proyide rnceniives iicruding p;yments lo encohage idvourabte tow-i,i€nsily h,mnsP'ac'ic"s

Geologi.al Conservation Reliew lhe Geological Conservalton Review was sla.ted in 1977 as a. earth science equtvatent ofSiie (GaR)i ion-slrtuioryi lhe NCR, to id€n1i8/ and publsh desc ptions of atl Brilish sites ol national andiddniilied by sli,iutory agencles iniernational €adh-science importan@. Colelage includes both geokEicat andcaisetuAtun geomorphologlc loatwes aranged as a se es ot cCR bto.ks each coverng a pe od of

. S€ologicallime, subled or geoqraptucalarea. ccF-btoct stes aro potenLat SSSts.

Heiiase coasi (Hc):

non.slatutoto /rrlrsdr-p

L.cal Naiure Rsse e iLNR):stalutory cbrse.yanlm

naltonal inierest,

M ine Consullahon AEa Sco and on v. An dentifcaiion by Scottish Naturat Heilboe of ar€as ot marne natur6

{MCA): non-ilatuLory consefraro; loorhcancei io encourage consultation wi$ ihe aqency on olher aciivities i6cdnseNai,n ihese areasl' Foimer pioposals fo. an titcA seies in England afid Wstes ad now targBly

supeBeded bi Enslish Nalure s tnianaht Aea, fbt Marke Mtdlite.

lvadne Na re Rosarvo {l\4NR): Desighaledunderih€WldlfeandCountrysideActlgstbytheSecreraryotslateonslalrlory corserr'rnor requcsr o rna sraiLrory co^>er\n.o1ao"rc"s rte oesisratior ororeore s conpl"/ aao

onv lwo s er Fave o€en oesiqnaled so tdr.

MANA6EMENT FOR RECREATlAN & WAT.RA|RD CONSERVAT/ON

7A

NallonalTirsl pbpedjes (Nl): The Naiional Tflrst. an ind€pondent cha ty roundod in 1895, and covertns rhe UK ei@ptnon-stalutory corseft aro, Scoiland, is th6 ,arg€st privst€ landowner in Biitain. The N.iional rrust ior S@lland has

simild objectivos. Undff Nalional Trusl ownaBhlp land is as fully prciected aqainsr

Royal S ociely for the PiIoclion The RSPB is lhe largesi volunlary wildlii6 conserv.tion body in Europe af,d has over 125

oi Birds ilserues (RSPB)r €serves in lhe UK. Reseryes sre.seneElly in ar€ss ol nigh wjldlile varue qnd m^<r,,eioi"siatuii!.y ,orseflatio, uardon€d and open. o lhe pubtic (a lew hav€ mstrcled access to avord dtslurbiig senai v6

okd pooLla,iorr. Ro56rys a,€ moshy pur\ar6d o. or torS tedses wri Jpprcprare,.,..' .,, I ,, : mpriagFicnt riqils, so wiJdlite safeguad le{els are hrgh Thrs aho wo*s wilh pann;re

daUo0s). Boslrv* ai€ moslly-pulchasod oi on lons leases wilh ;ppiopnabnenl ghts so trirtrrite lahguarc re{qs a,e h.gt Th,s also trofr5 wiln patuers

MANAA€MfNT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERBlRD CONSERlAT/AN

79

particular, to wetlands of intemational impor-tance. In practic€ this meais that many wetlandsare desiSnated under boft the Ramsar Conveir-tion and Btuds Dircctive in Britain (Davidson e, .r1.

1991), as elsewhere in Europe.

Wetlands selected as o{ intematioral importanceunder the Ramsar Convention fall into threecategories:

. parlcula y good examples oi a specfic wetland lype char

acterislic oi ls region

. ,ellclds rporlall lo' rerra r p ar ald a. tra .perEs:

e.g. rare, vulnerabe or endangered popolauons and as-

semblagesi endemic speces or comm!niliesr quality and

pecu ia ty oi lhe r species in ma nlain nq qenelic and eco'

loq ca diverstyi and as habiiat for species al citicalslages

in ihen blological cycle

. l^,ellands mporlani ior wateriowl: regular y supporlinq

20,000 walerfow or l% of the populalion of a species or

subspecest or requarly supportng imponanl popualions

oJ wale ow nd cal ve ol weuand valoes produclivity or

In practice the numerical citeria (e.8. the 1% popu-lation crite on) Ior site selection for migratorywaterlowl populations have prov€d so far the mostwidely and readily applicable. By December 1995,

there wef,e 771 Ramsar sites in 91 countdes world-wide, of which over half (408) were in WestemEurope (Fmzier 1996). By Iuly 2001 there were 124

contracting pafties with 1073 wedands of inter-

UANAGEMENT FOR RECR€AT|ON & WATERA/RO CONSERYAT/ON

a0

national importance designated, coveiing81,766,195 hectares (inJomation Irom RamsarConvention Buleau). There ar€ 118 Ramsar sites

covedflg 482658}ta in the UK.

Boih the Ramsar Convmrion and the Birds Direc-tivelead io the designation of a suitc ofsitcs, eachoI which supports an important component oF

migratory bird populations. Implicit in this is theneed for cGordimted action betweer cormtdes o!migratory fl)'ways so as to consewe a shared rc-source. S11ch co-operation foms the basis of forexample, the 1992 Odessa Protmol on kterrationalCo operation on Mi$atory Fl)May Research andConservation (Wader Study Croup 1992). lt has

also been stesse.l by more rccent meetings of theContracting Parties to the Ramsar Convention(Ramsar Convention Bureau 1990, 1993), and isexplicit in the Bonn Convention (see turther, sec-

tion5.2.1.3).

lhp Bird. DirpL lr\ e Bo\ ems wdlertot\ I hun hn8 m

the European Union (EU). Member States areobliSed lo maintain populations of naturally oc-curring bird species at levels conesponding to eco-logkal requirements, to rcgulate tade in bnds, toIimit hunting to species able to sustain exploita-tion and to prohibit certain methods of captureand killing (Temple Lang 1982). Each MemberState legislates for hunting and is required io takespecial measures to co1rselve the habitat of spe-

MANAEFMFNT FOP PFCRFA ON & WATFRB|RD

cies listed in Aimex I oI the Directive and anythreatmed and regularly migratory species plesent.

Amex II species (Box s.4) may be hunted undernational legislaiion provided that hunting pres-sures do notjeopardisc conservation efforts in theirdistribution area. Member states are required toensure thai wate owl (arld otho bird) hurtingcomplies with national and intemational legislation and the p nciples of 'wise usd, ecologicallyba,anced conhol oI the species concerned and iscompatible with pmtection of eggs, nests, habitatsand established rules of exploitation (see Madsenet dl. 1995 for turther details).

5.2. 1.2 Habitats Directive

A further intemational measurc of major Europeanimportance in delivering wetland and waterbirdconseivation is the development of fie 1992 "ttubitats Direciive" (EC Directive on the ConseffationoI Natural Habitats and Wild Fauna and Flora -Dnective 92la3l EEC).

The implemc'ntation of the Habitats Directive hasfocused aitcntion and activiq, on fie objective ofestablishing a coherent European ecological n€t-work of sites, tobeknownas "Natura 2000". Un-der the Dire\rtive this is adieved by Member States

fir.l ,denh4 m8 J.urle of 5rlp- of r,'mmun,t\ im-portance at a national level. Subsequent\ thesesite' mdy. wirh Conrni-sron dSrpemenl. be de-r6

nated as Special Areas of Conservation (SACS).

For species, the Directive provides lists of plantsand animals (except birds, which arc covered bythe earlier Birds Directive) whose conserationrequires designation oI SACS, and others in fleed

oI strict protection or whose exploitation may re-quire appropriate management measures.

There are a large number of r retland habitat t)?eslisted in the Habitats Directive (based on theCORINE classfication oI biotopes), although there

are some gaps such as graz ing marshes and otherlowland wet gasslands. Those habitats that are

considered in danger o{ disappearance and whoce

mnse is larsely within tl'e EC area are temed "pri-

oritr, habitats". These are afforded a higher degreeof protection. SACS are curently b!'ing selectedthroughout the EC, and in the LrK ovcr 200 havebeen selected for consideration for designaiion,many being or including wetland habitats.

The Directive establishes links with the Birds Di-r€ctive, noiably that the Natura 2000 site netwoikis to be fomed from both SACS a]ld SPAS. Hcncethe two desiSnations appear complementary.Since sites of community importance rnay be iden-tified under th€ Habitats D ective that are alreadydesignated or proposed SPAS, th€re will be somegeographical overlap in the two desi8nations con-lnbuting lo ihe \arura 2000 li.l nlic ^\erlip ic

likely tobe particularly large in habitats used bysignificant waterbird populations. For example38,780 ha oI saltmarsh, some 87% of the total areaof saltmarsh habitat in Britain, is within thepr€sent British SPA network (whicl1 will eventually coverwell over 90% ofBritishsaltmarsh). Thisis because saltmarshes provide importallt {eedin&roosring and nesting habitat {or waterbirds. ALmost all (99%) of drc SACS selected {a]l within these

SPA areas (N.C. Davidsorr unprblished).

A particular significance ofthe Habitats Directiveis th.rt ir rt,v.E h.rbiLrLs ln th. mdnnL (nviron-ment as wefl a5 dlos€ on larrd and its implementa-tion rcqunes the designation of marine SACS thatextend below the low water mark (the lower limj tin practice {or other, terrestrial designations). SACS

will therefore include parts of estuaries and otheriruhore madne areas nnportant for waterbirds thatarc not currently cov!'red in the SPA network.

Article 10 of the Habitats Drective is particularlyimportant in relation to migratory watel{owl. Itindicates the imponance of improving the ecologi-cal coherence of Natura 2000 by encouraging themanagement oI linear {eatules and those tlut tunc-tion as €ssential stepping-stones in the mi$ationof species- Hence the Habitats Directive {ocuses

turther attention on the wetland n€tworks ofmi$atorywate owl.

5.).1. r Agre<menr on Ih( I on.ervarion olAlrican-Eurasian Migralory Watcrbirds

The Bom Convention on the "Coflservation oIMigatory Species o{ Wild Animals" includes amechanismlor establishingAgreements betweengloups o{ Range States Ior the conseFation andmanagement of migratory sp€cies, with such agr€e-

ments covering all aspects of the species' conser-

FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERA/RO CONSEPVAflON

8l

vation including habitat conservation. Recently,and of particular impodance to the protection ofwatlybird populations in AJrica-Eurasia, is the"Agreement on the Conservation of Ahican-Eura-sian Migratory Waterbirds" (AIWA). Th€ leadwas taken in 1988 by the Dutch govemment indrawing up the Ageement and Adion PIan, andthe consultative meeting of rangc srates in 1994recommcnded thar the Ageemeni be conctuded.The Ageement was adopted by consensus by allthe range states in -1995

and an Inte m Secretariatestablished in 1996. In 1999 the rcquired 14 ranSestates signing up to the Agreement was achievedand it came into eflect on 1 November 1999.

This Agreement provides an important newmechanism for co-ordinating and linking corcer-vation action ai the flyway scale, and provides aframework for developint consistent site safe-guards and co-ordinated species/populationconseryation stat€gies. such consistent actionmay prove oi 8r€at value since rhere is cunentlygeat variation in the level and extent o{ safeguardsapplied in different parts of a flyway. This meansthat dle degree of habitat safeguard {or individualwaterbird species varies considerably betweencounties, fll.ways and seasons (c.g. see Davidson& Piercma 1992).

Thp AfWA i\ to be implempnteLl lhruuSh d.ericsof Action Plars, whose reqdremenis are wideranging, covering species conservatio& habitarconservatiory human activity management re-

search and monitoring, educ:tion and inJorma-tion" and implementation. Thcse are to be under-taken in a mamer consistent with the general con-seration m€asures rcquired by the agreemeni,,umJndr ited h Bo\ 5.<. f he firsr A( tron tldnim-plementing these gmeml pdnciples covers swdb,geese and ducks (Anatidac), storks (Cicoriidae),and spoonbills (Threskiomithidae). rt conraiffseveral actions relating speciJicaly ro rhe effectsand managcment of human activities such as recreatio& and specifically hunting.

Th€ Actiol Plan identifies that hunting may con-tinue on a sustainable us€ basis where huntint ofsuch populations is a long esrablished cultuElpractice, but thai this sustainabte me shalt be

a2

MANAGE|IIENT FOR RECREAT|ON & WATEPR|RO CONSERYAT/ON

conduct€d within the framework of the special pr(}visions described in an intemational species ac-

tion plan. Importantly, Parties are required to co-operale lom.urc lhal lh.irhunting lesi.lJrion implements the piinciples of sustainable use, takinginto account the geographical ranSe o{ fte rclevantspecies a]ld then Lfe history characteristics. Morespecilicaly it requires co-operation to:

. develop harmonlsed recordiig ol hunting ha esis and to

provide esl males lor annual lake of each populalon

. endeavour to phase oul ead shol in welands by lhe year

2000

. reduce and elminaie poisoned bals

. rcduce or elim nale illegallakiog

. encou6ge hunters to group togelher to co-ordinale acliv-les and help ensure sustainability

. Dromoie a prolciency lesl ior hunters, includ nq bid iden-

More gmeyally on human activities, there is a re-quiremeflt to assess and publicise the impact ofproposed Eoiects that may cause conflict withh dlprbird pofulations. dnd lo pr.motc high envi-ronmental standards Ior the plaruring and conshuction ol sLructures so as Lo rruIulnise Lhelr impact on waterbi-rd populahons. Of parLicdar importance in providing a Suiding framework formanaging reereational use o{ wetlands is para-

Sraph 5.3.6 of the Action Plan-

One key requirement refers to disturbance-frce

"ln cnsesuherc h mdnriisl rbance thrpLtens the.un-seruatia stfltus of uaturbird populations AiskA i Ta-

bb 1), Pdtties sholtLLl deauour to takE neasures to

limit the laeL of theut. Apprcpriate meas rcs mqhtindailitet aha, thl estdblishment ofdisturbance freezonesinpratectedarcasuh ep blic aruss is not pernittal.

In additiorr ihe Agreement encourages cross-se{-tor Fogrammes to develop sensitive and appro-priate ecotoudsm at wetlands holdinS wate6irdconcentrahons, but avoiding cor€ zones o{ protected arL'as. H$ce the AEW-& as it develops, prc-vides a valuable framework and impetus for coun-tries to operate ai both fh'way arld national levelsin implementing sustainable management ofwaterbirds in rclation to the efaects of human ac-

tivities.]I,IA NA A EMENT

5.2.1.4 Action plans

Aside from the AEWA Action Plaff describedin thc previous section, a vari€ty of other "actionplans" is incieasingly used as an approach inintemational waterbird conseNation. Theseare variously called "action", "recovery"/"conservation" or "management" plans, but {allinto two brcad types.

First there are expert analyses of the conseruationr€quirements o{ species or habitats that provide a,trdlegc rp\ iet\ u.efu I fLrr conservation agcn.ie..but at most these provide a bluepdnt for tutureaction by a wide range of govenmental and nongovemmental bodies. Reviews of the conservation needs of populations alon8 migatory fl),waysIal1 into this category. Examples include Lane &Parish (1991) for the Asian-Australasian fl)rway;Davidson & Piersma (1992) for the knot, andDavidson el a7. (1995) for shorebhds globally.

Second are plarls resl ting from the working tGgether of parties responsible for initiating actions.These provide both a statemmt of need and some,mually mor€ {ormalised, commitmmt towardsactions to deliver fl},.way conservation e.3. Suoud(1992b) for Creenland white-{ronted goose andBlack (1998) for bamade goose. Examples includethe Nodr American Waterfowl PIan.

Single-species action plans have focused on glo-bally theatened species. Under the Beme Conven-tion, these have now been developed for 23 Euro-pean globaly dT€atensl (or near-threat!'nsl) birds,including nine waterbirds (Hc'redia ef l,1.

'l 996). Ofthese only the aquatic warbler occurs regularly inBritain but for another, the white-headed duck,actions are idmtified in Britain for the int(oducedNorth Ame can ruddy duck. Broader global ac

tion plans fot taxa are also being prepared throughruCN's Species Survival Commission. These rcview the conservation status of all species andpopulations, and then focus on actions for glo-bally ttueatened (or near-threatened) species andpopulatims. Under this initiative an AnseriformesAction Plan is in preparation (Callaghan 1996)

and a Shorebird Action Plan is proposed (Stroud1997).

The AEWA Action Pla]l requires the developrnentand implementation o{ boft intemational (fll.waylevel) and national species action plans. Forwaterbirds this links closely with the prcparationof national Biodive$ity Action Plans (BAPS) for

FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERB/RO CONSERYAT/ON

a3

a1

both habitats and species as part oI national gov-ernme,llts' implementation of the Rio BiodivercityConventior (Box 1.5). ln BdtairL BAIS have nowbem prepared for all priority species and habi-tats, with directional statements for additionalp1aff covering broad habitat types arld plans forwork on further spccies and lubitats. These BAPS

review factors aff&rting the species or habitat, settargets and idmdfy coil.selvation measures. Manvconcem wetland habitats and their speries G vLsO

1994a; IJI( Biodiversity Group 2001).

5-2.2 Integruted planning a 11 managenent

Given the o{ten diverce politics, policies and inter-ested groups suflounding recreation andwaterbird conseratio& effective and equitableplarming and management will usually be de-perdent on the caretul integration of these factols.In particular, inte$ation must seek to tully involvea[ key stakeholders in plamin8 and managementissues and ensure all associatcd policies al]dpoliiics are harmonised to the erient possible.

Frobdblv thp mosl fopular inle$atcd pl.minSand management process relevant to r€creationand wate$irds is "Coastal Zone Management"(CZN{). The Boal of CZM is to use arl integatedapproach to achieve sustainable use of natuml,pl'rysical al1d biological resources of the coastalzone. Approaches difler tEtween and er'ithin coun-tries, and have complex overlaps in some placesand patchy coverag€ in others (see Box 5.6 and5.7). Huggett (1995) has provided a detailedreview o{ CZM in the UK.

The Envtuonment Agency has developed L,(]cal

Environmmt Action Plans (LEAPS), which pro-\.ide managcment plal]ning for whole dvcy sys-t€ms. These plans could be extremely importantin promoting biodiveEity in wedand habitats, es

pecially those associated with rivers. However,although LEAPS could in theory make a sitniJi-cantcont butio& an RSPB report Iound that theywere deJicient in rna]Iy areas in not setting targetsfor the achievement of biodivenity enhanc€ment-The rcport rcconmended tlut therc shodd be suchtargets set in each LEAP, ard that these should belinked to UK Biodiversity Action Plan targets(Wood & Oates 1999).

FurtfH ahead" the EU Water Framework Diledive(2000/ 60/ EC), which was agreed in the year 2000,i ould prov'Je a mdjor.lep tL,hdrd- the a( hieve-ment of real inte$ated plaminS and management

ANAAEt|ENT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERRIPO

within the context o{ new dver catchment plans.The Directive has the foltowing key aims:

. expanding lhe scope ol water prolecton to all walers, surface walers and ground waler

. achiev ng 'good sratus' Ior att waters by a set dead ne

sell ng an ecoloq ca basis for lhe defnilon of qood

. water managemenl based on river bas ns

. combined approach' of emiss on lim I va ues and quallty

. getlinq the prces rght

. 9elling the cilizen nvolved more c osely

. stieamlining leg s aton

Although not to be fuly implemented in all its as-pects until 2015, the Water Frameuork Directivenev€rtheless requires member states to introducenational regulations on most aspects well beforethen- Crucialy, it will rcquirc the completion o{much oI the plannin& analysis and assessmentstages Ior inteSrated dver basin management inthe irnmediate tuture.

ln relation to the conseffation o{ wetlands and. waterbirds and their relationship to recreatioi" the

Directive offers a nunber o{ distinct advantagesover the current pi€{emeal approach to catchmentplaming. Amongst these are the identjJication ofa single lead body (thc 'competent authodt/) tobe responsible for the delivery a]rd implementa-tion oI ver basin management plans. This willbe the Enyircnment AgencyinEngland and Walesand is the Scottish Environment Protedion Agencyin Scodand. The Dfuective works towards achiev-ing favourable status Ior waterbirds, and whilstftere is still discussion on the treatment of heavilymodified waterbodies, and what exactly constitutes a waterbody or wetland, their status willbeassessed on ecological grounds as well as onchemical and quality parameteb. Giound watersand surface waters will boft be included, andalongsid€ economic analysis oI costs and benefits,there must also be an analysis of the impact ofhuman activities on the ecological status of at1 suchwaters. Finally, therc is a requirement for publicconsultalion and stakehotder dialogue at a[ stages.

Participatory management has been advanced inr€cent yeafs as a means of seclrring co-operationand understanding between diverse stakeholders,and has proven to b€ a useful tool in natuml re-source management (see Reitergen-Mccracken1998 for pointen on principl€s and practice). AtRutland Water (England), this approach has beenparticularly effective (Box 5.8). Int€grated plan-

.*

t:

Mthin the l.lK, the government has encouisged En integ€led approach to coasial managefiert through a

documents and lhroush enablshns lh'oe Coasial Fotums (tor Eiqlaid, Saolland hsd W;ler. These lead

oI Commons Envnonn€o1 Comftiliee epo( on coastal zone protection and planniog. Guidancs

PPG 25 i.

85

MANAGEMENT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERBlRD CONSERYAT/ON

Box5;?: Coastat20ne Management ICZMI-the Berwickshireand North NorthumberlandCoast {Noilhumbrian County Councit 1r99)

Go ar

rF" nai soatorl|ep{ec,*.sloopvetopaslreleo,rarrgeren.o..rBea,rsti,eald!orr,\orlrroqardCoa,SoF-d Arec ol Conse^aron, *hi!l- sq, de!olared io tqq6 ". o1e o, 3c rarre sACi .rovoloL. ,r uK. rp oroi6..involved consullaiio0 wiih all stakoholdeG 50 lhal rl aspedsollheuseofrhesLeaswetasits.onsswatonandlaragerFlr roud be r1.o.po.a.6o

Consideraiions

lrp sAC tas ,oI ra,r'ar,res o, cor.er/anor .prelt

lnt€rlidal and subiidal rcefs occlr ihoughoui the areai lhese are some ot rho mosi diveBe known in lhe nonh east of the Ut(and coniain maoy species chatacteristic of cold waler as well as warmer waler spectes. Sea caves ac atso tound throughoutlh€ sile, varyhg in size from a few metrcs Io extensive systoms which may exiend hundreds of mones nlo lhe roct Theyiypically are colonized by en$ustng aniosl specles bul can also suppod shad€ lolerant alsae. tnt6rtidat sand ilats andaro als are e\16

'):ve esolca.y,1r10 d'eo drc tro to'v t{ard r1d Buorp 8ar rese,upoorrero,re,terrvezosrera

aqtstrcd a.d - rolu beos 01 ,p L/ easr toost tes6r,ear.rppol,orrLlr6!orsmdt ru<.acea1s d1d ad1rc eorn<and ihere e large mussel M/i/rs edrl,s beds. The inteftidalareas support lnternationally impodanr concontralons otwlnle ng wlldtowi and saders. GEy seats Haljchoerus grypre, ol which the UK hotds 50-74% of lhe wortd poputalion and95% oi lhe European Union populaton arc abundani in ihe ares. The colony on the F6.is tstands s lhe largesr id EagtaDd,

- - wrth 4 000 rndividuais and represenls one ot the mosl souiheny b@edlng siles in lhe UK east coasl. The undisturbed nature ota6 I'e .sardr ,, rlolgh! rc oe -1La',o,\e uccess orbeedio seab

A wide vaiieiy ol human actililies lake ptace in the arca, som6 of lhe most tmportant oi whtch ae:

Bail diggng has been a tGdiiional activlly on lnledidal areas bul has been prohibiled over most or rhe areas around Ltndisfa.nebecause oi lhe dlsturban@ il caused to habilats and wnteing birds. Pleasure boar ng - lhe wildiiie ot the area is a signtllcaottounsi resoure and sightseeing t ps aE made i@m seve.al locailons. The vessets are rcgutaled and lhe tandings on theFame hlands (Nallonal Trusi ouned) are Bstricted. Diving is a populd activtiy over parls of the site. I ts nol regutaled bui avolunla.y code of conducl operales and lhe size and number of shelnsh knded by div66 are monilored. Net iishe es inctudea d li nel lishery for salmon south ol Lindisfame which is rcgulated and monttored by the Envircnmenr A96ncy There areaiso iixed neis for salmon in Nonhumberland and BeNickshne which are pnvately ownod but eubjeci to managemenl by lheRver tk"ed coEr'srioners c^o he cro , Fs:.e (oTmhs.orel. land-bdsed -c."at,or r: - "--- -i,i r,l"a@a, concentraied ;round hol spois soch as Lindisfarne and Sl Abbs Head, Waterbased .ecrealion ts atso impo(anl andncludes 5a inO. sudrng warer sliinq canoeing and windsuding os well as molo.ized peBonat cra,t. Ihe activily in BudteBay is .equlaied by Nallonal Naiure Res-brye by€laws. Wlldfouling is a popular winter acrivly especiatly al Lindtsfame,though Ihe number df pa.licipants is declinlng. Englsh Naiure. in cooperation wilh ihe E tish Assoctation tor Shooiinq andCoroeparion ope'are ald ool@ a pe_T:r s,sren a . ndi.d.lp

Msnagedenl FraBework

Following consullalions belween all stakeholders, an Aclion Plan has be€n devetoped which tisls the managemeni acrionsrequired, lh6 lbad agency responsible add lhose agencies rn a suppodrig role. The plrn lncudes aclion on aU the aEas ofrLrl arrv(y 'ter/ Lo ra/e an iapa. ol 16 sire erd sels oLr a tirFccao over wttn "a.t- a..:or , lo be dche.pd.

lfiplerenl.tion

The prolect and Aclion Phn is oveBeen by a Manaqement Group .onsslrng ol represenlarrves ftom authorti€s in lhe area wiihoowerrore'LaldJrdsalerralagerell l.r"ptrarlu"lyro.6v.eworooressorJ-era1aoeae.,<t6To5 p.oouc"s dlAnnual Repod, \,!hich is c.culaiod among consuttees and an Advisory Commtileo

ning l'las also been applied to larger areas such as

the Norfolk Broa.is (Broads Authority in draft) -seeBox5.9.

Geographic lnformation Systems (GlS) can be a

powedul tool for integrating plaming and management, in particular became t}rev albw anyamoun t of layers o{ inlormation to bc mapped onbp of cach Lrther using real world coordinates.MANAGEMENT FOR RECREAT/ON A WATERB/RA

However, they car be expensive to purchase and,rdnno\^ er J ill- need to be JF\ clopeJ ndmdm-tained in ord er to male full use of them.

5.2.) ENironne tal Inpa.l lssessme tnndcost-benefit andlrti\

The conlirlued growth of rL'creation needs to bemanagcd care{ulv so that effects and impacts on

waierbirds and then habitat arc minimis€d. Environrnental Irnpact Assessment (EIA) js us€d to de-temine the optimum solution for a proposed ac-li! r$ lhdl mdy dj{ccl the envrronmenr. In il:.im-plest form, it is a plaffing tool that is now reBardedas an integal component of sound decision-mal-ing. As a planning tool it has both an inJormationgathering and a decision making componentwhich provides the decision maker with an objec-rive ba.is for $anbn& modiJyin8 or denying d

proposed development (see Gilpin 1995). Hence,all major new Breational activities on or arounda wetland, or significant expansion of existingactivities aheady established, should be subject toan EIA. Box 5.10 Fovides arl outline o{ contentsthat should be included in such an assessment.Infomation on EIAS carl be obtained from thewebsites oJ a number oI organizations, includingthe Institute of Ecology arld Environmental Man-agement Thc Institute for Environmental Assess-ment and the Departmentfor Environment, Foodand Rural AJfairs.

Cost-benefit analysG (CBA) is another tool thatmay be used to evaluate the pros and cons of a

Eoposed activity, and €.momic CBAS are ineeasingly being used in environmental projects. Thegoal is to categorise and value the curent and tu-ture costs and benefits of a proposed activity. Thefinancial benefits and costs are discounted andcompared, and those projects where the net valueis positive can be taken forward for further analy-sis. Many social and environmental values aredifficult and imprecise to estimate. Evm so, techniques used to value ecological non-market goods(c.8. clean water) are becoming more sophisticatedand it is probable that these goods will inreasingly be valued by seic'ty (see e.S. Perolov 1993).

5.3 Management technlqu€B

The variety of problems associated withrecreation and waterbirds can be tackled by adiversity of manaSement techniques. Th€se can beba.ed on t}le marugcment of(rle..md lheir cpe.iec

or the managernent ofr€oeational participants andtheir equipm.'nt (Box 5.11 and Box 5.12). In thissection, (p di.cuss each ol lhe le.hnique.highlighted in Box 5.11 separatety and providecase studies o{ their implementatiofl. Together,these techniques Fovide a synthesis of methodsthat are currentlybeingused to manage fl:(cationon and around wetlands in a more ecologicallysustainable manner.

FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERBIAO CONSERYAT/AN

a7

5-3-l Sites an.l species d agenent

5.3.I I Habitatnanagemenl

Both angling and shootinS activities commor yinvolve the nunagement o{ habitat in an attemptto imprcve sporthg conditions. Indeed, the valuc-added incentive placed upon wetlands via thesetwo activities has resulted in large areas o{ habitatbeinS created or restored which, with good management, can offer substantial benefits to waterbirdpopulations (sce ..9. Boa 5.13).

In th€ UK and elsewhere, angling interests havebeen key players in stream restoration proiects_ A

common goal has been to recreate pool-and fllesequ€nces, and promote the growrh o{ emergentand submergent vegetatio& providing importanihabitat Ior a varieiy of wildli fe. The expedmentalrcstoration of Dorset chalk streams, involving live-stock fencing and building in sream sEucturesthat scour pools and deposit ffles, has resultedin substantial increases in wild brown trout,salmo& native cmyfish, water crcwfoot beds andvaried new habitats for a wide variety of otherwetla]ld species (ciles & Sumners 1996). Coarsefish ver habitat r€sto.ation also has great poten-tial to produce similar benelits and currcnt re-search on lowland rivers is assessing the poten-tial of methods such as comer pool excavatiory

a8

MANAGEMENT FOR RECREAflON & WATERRIPD CONSERYAT/O

89

dffle and-pool reinstatement and iflreas€d coverprovision (Swales & O'Hara 1983; Pearce &C/Hara 1984 Cowx & Welcomme 198). lnter€stedrcaders should also consult the 'IUanual of RiverRestoration Tedmiques', docurnenting compre-hensive rcstomtion proje.ts on two English riverc,fie Cole and Skerne (RRC 1999).

Other habitat management for angling conrmonlyincludes the following measures (from Giles 1992;

NRA 1994b):

. control ol bank-side.nd subm€rgenl vegetation by

culling/dredging and herbicide application lo open up fish-

ns areas (or'swims').

. addilion ol fedilker (usualy manrc) ro nnease productvily.

. addiiion of lime to ncrease warer pH.

. addiiion ol Darloy rlrrw ro'"dr'6 dlgs g'ow.l-.

The effects of vegetation contlol (pGctised to dearbanksides and to prevent snaggint o{ anSlers'lines) will depend on the nature of the site and theintensity and tilning o{ the opemtion; it is more

likely to result in adveNe effects on waterbirds andother wildlife at seisitive sites or widlin areas o{high angler density. Clltting and dearance o{ve8-€tation should be avoided during spring and early\ummer. when di"ruption tu breedmS \pe.res.particularlywate6irds, is likely. Idealy, cuttinSshould be carried out in late surffner or auturnnand the veSetation removed; the deaEnce of bar*-side hees, hee roots and dead wood should beavoided (NRA 1994b). Herbicides should also beavoided and only used when physical contlol isineffective. Conseft from tlle Environment Agencyis needed and only DEFRA approved pesticidesshould be used near water, and application o{ thesechemicals should be limited to early spdn& wh€nplant biomass is low and hence deoxySenationresultin8 Irom the b(ealdown o{ dead vegetationis least likely to be a Foblem (NRA 1994b).

Regarding f€rtiliser and time applicatior! t}rcs€ ca]Ibe particularly damaSing to wetlands, especiallythose of naturally low pH- The or y way to avoidthe potential neftive effects is to avoid applicatior altogether. It should be noted that the

FOR P€CREAT/ON & WATERB/RD CANSERlAT|ON

90

Box 5.11: PrincipaI areas of conftict between recreation and waterbird conservation andpossibte manegement techniques lsee Box 5.12 fordescription oftechniques)

M.nagomonl techniqusa (. pihary; . sBcondary)

!sr-Et t5g a; F; igsHPS;i-iirPgLe 5 E e .biE E : C : E s F 1 .a ; i;BhgegiSE

I,IANA6E ENT FOR RECREANON E WATERA/RO CONSERVAT/ON

'I

application oI fextjliser is likely to result in greater

$owth oI aquatic plants (i{ a switch to an algae-domindled syslem i.dvoided). which rnay requiFIunher nanagement to opefl suitable fishing ar-eas (N(A 1994b).

A measure of contol over exc€ssive algal gowthcan be gained through the caretul addition o{ bar-ley stlaw to a wetland. The straw is enclosedwifiin wire mesh and positioned within wateri lows. It rel€as€s otherwise harmless chemicalsthat inhibit algal growth (Giles 1992). This is aninerpensive managemenl lool thJt cdn ha\ ed po\r-tive environmental impact with carcftrl applica-tion (contact the Centre for Aquatic Plant Manage-ment {or further details, Appendix II). However,over-abundance of algde in tr etland. i. inmt'timesdue to over-stocking oI fish, and hence fish stocksshould be managed in a more ecologically sustainable manner wherever possible (see section5.3.1.3).

l{abitat management for shooting usually focuseson creating conditions optimal for a {ew targetspecies, usually dabbling ducks. Such manage-ment in particular Iocuses on providing an abun-dance of apprcpriate food, open water for restingand suitdble ne-lm8 cover. Al \ome \iI r Lhi{ i\practiced intensivel, where common practicesinvolve (aner Callaghan et al.1995,199n:

w.ler level manipul.lion (oiten d.a n nq most of ihewelland ior lhe summer period every 1-5 years).

rsduction ol bods of 6merg€nt plante (hrouqh

burning, herbcdes, graznq or cuttinq).

MANA6EMENT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERR/RD CANSFPVA.|OM

92

. reduclion oI fish slocks (throuOh poisoninq or

. applic.tion of lime to lncrease waler pH.

These management measures often result in anincrease in target waterbird numbers, thus implov-ing shootrng success. But it can o{ten be accompa-nied by a decline in the diversity of wate$irdsa]ld other wetland wildlife, since habitat diversitydl d .ile dnd o\ er d l.md., rpe, an be teduced sig-

ni{icantly. This is a particular FoblL'm in NorthAme ca (Callaghan e, aL1995, P9n.

Bu ffer zones or re{ug€s }lave become popular ele-ments of habitat management {or shootinS in recent years- At wedand sites, tlley are usualy st ps

of natural veSetation allowed to develop along thewetland edge. With regard to recreatiory they canbe used to reduce access to smsitive areas of th€waterside, and in so doing alleviate associateddisturbance and bank-side erosion. AlBo, the talve8etation that usuafly develops can act as a visualscreen and hence turdrcr reduce distudan re. Asidefrom reducing receational impact, buffer zonescan offer a variety of other benelits to waterbildsand other wildlile:

. fiealon ol habitat cotridoh ior wldlife.

. frprov6ment ol hab tar for wildlife (e.9. nestinq areas ior

wat6rb rds and bank's de cover for iish).

. stabilisalion ol banks through rooted veqeiation (especialy

Irlnging rank qrasser.

. reduction ol polluiion from adjacenl larmland by prcvding

zoies free from spray ng and muck-spreadinq.

. reduclion ol pollution lrom adlacent land by biologicalbeak-

down of pollulants by so m crojauna (nilrogen and pho!phorus removal can be near y 100%).

. reduclion oi sili npuis from adlacent land (e g autumF

BulIer zones should be at least 5m wide, with a

gen I le slopp ho frp wd rr ed 8e. su b -o field d ra in"need to be diverted across bdler strips to lacilitateiheir bmefits. Some {orm o{ vegetation manate-mentmd) be necded. such ds low-densiry Bra/ mgor harvestin& which can be a sorrce o{ revenue(e.8. through the sale of hawested willow, reed orhar. For rurttrcr advice on the benefits and (:Iea-

tion of bufier zones in drc UK contact DEFRA, EN,or EA (see Appendt [ {or contact details).

MANAAEMENT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERB|RO

A common problem with powered water sports isbank-side erosion ftom wave-wash. This is man-aged mmmonly by poEitioning wood or metal pan-els along the shoreline and back filling with de-brjs (known as "bank-revetment"). This etrectivelyremoves the Iittolal ftinge, which foms importanthabitat not only for waterbirds, h1t many otherwildlife species. Where rcducnons in wave-washare not possible (e.9. through zoning or speed lim-ils), considemtion should be given to planting spe-

cies tolemnt of wave-wash beaore bank-revetment.Haslam (1978) Fovides usetul Factical guidanceon fte relative sensitivity of different v!'getation to

In summary, tlle manipulation o{ habitats to suitthe n€eds of a few target species should be avoided,and habitat management should aim to produce adiverciq of hdbitJF q piLdlof a pariirular reFon(see e.g. Box5.14). This provides greaterbenefitsto biodiversity and helps to ensure a diverse andhealthy assemblage of wedand species, !,r'hich in-cidmtally helps meet futule rcseanonal needs (es-

peciaty Ior shooting and angling). Potential nega-tive eg€cts should L€ idedrfied t eJore managementcornmences and these should be balanced aSainstthe need for management. Consideration shouldbe given to altemative management approacheswherever negative consequences are likely. Withcaretul plarming, the inte$ation of habitat needsfor re, reatjon ard , onserv.rlron chould be po"<i-ble without too many compromises on either side(see e.g. Box 5.14 and 5.15). A wide diwercity oftechniques are available, many oi which are de-sc bed in detail in the habitat management hand-books highlighted in Box 5.1.

5.3.1.2Landscape design

With carefu I scremin& the continuance a]ld evenincrease of rccreational activilies can b€ accorFmodated with negligible disturbance (see c-9. Box5.r6).

Many o{ the problems associated wiih recleanonandwate$ ds can be avoided or limited throughcaretul lands{ape desiSn, which is especially rcl-evant to sites that are being created or restored.Former industrial sites, especially mineral work-ings, offer fetile $ound for wetland creation andm11ch attmtion ha.s been given to this area recendy(see e.g. Gawn 1983, Bickmore & Lamrd 1989;

Andrews & Kinsman 1990, Ciles 1992, James 1992;

MerriH loq4: Bo\ 5.14) Thc land..ape de.i8nprocess should include:

CONSERYATlON

I

. accurale idenllcalon o, th€ sle boundares

. invesligalion of siie hydrology.

. survey ol exisling ecology, inc uding sutrounding areaswh ch hay acl as sources lor co onisation of new

. d€finilion of leSal and manaaement requ remenis

delinilion ol wildlife and recrealion objeclives.

descr piion ol lhe rcquiroments, charactorislics and

polenlal interactons oi w dtile and recreation.

detailed desgn ol the requ red tandscape inctuding bio-

ogica ieatores, physica f€alures and tand- and wateruse

carelul definition of the Iul v suat envetope' trom key

93

MANAAEMENT FOR RECREAT/AN 8. WATERA/RD CONSERYAT/ON

94

Habitat colridols can be useful {or rcducing theeffe.ts oI rccreation on wetland wildli{e, since theyallow sp€ci€s to move betw€en areas, includinghabitats outside the site boundaries. Also,islands,chamels, earth molrnds (bunds), bays, hedges andpeninsulas can be very helpful to zone activitiesand reduce disturbance. Meritt (1994) explainsthat ldndlorm. ,ud1 .r- bund., irl d, d pprunsulas are best for screening distu$in8 noises,Iorinstance Irom water-skiin& whilst various typesof \ eSetd tion are ddequ a lc tor lhe .crpeninS ol \ Fu-dl\ d isturbm8.tunuL .ut h a\ d..F.r pdtlr. ro vr.i-tor cenhes or bird-watching hides.

5.3.1.3 Species managemenl

Both {ish and waterbirds are oftm managed in-tensivety for angling and shooting. Ideally, man-agemmt should be based at the population level,as lhi. i, whlY. impact. (dn be med-u-rpd [ti. is

easier whcle populations arc sedentary, small .mdnolated. but m,'rc diJfi, ult for miSrJtoD specier

that are sFead across a large geogaphic range.

The curent tend in fishedes biology is to try todefine disrinct populations (or stocks) so as tu beablc to under.rdnd rheir individual dyndmi(processes and so manage them effectively. Birdsolten concenhate along migratory 'flyways' andmanagement oI a given population must alsoincorporate the key geo$aphical aspects of thisdimension. Furthemore, it is useful to rememberthe possible evolurionary migraiory strategies ofeach species. For example, waterbirds whosenumb€rs may be limited by a shortage of treedingareas (e.9. eider ducks) will have been selected tomaaimise use of this habitat. On the other hand,species whose numbers depend on overwintersurival and hence wintering habitats (e.& teal)may be selected {or efficient use o{ th€se areas.

Such ideas provide a useful framework forconsideration and potential understanding ofpotenLral encrSeii, boldene(ls lor.uni\al in a

Siven species (e.8. Alerstam 1990). Clearly, anydisturbance effects would be critical in the areaswhich limit survival, whereas in nonlimitiflgarcas the effects may be small.

IIIANA6€MENT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERA/RD CONSTRVAT/ON

The management of fish and waterbirds for an-gling and sho.linB oflen rn\olve..loclinB.whereby individuals, usually of captive origin, are

rcleased into the wedand to improve sporting suc-

cess. Over-stocking could result in habitat degra-dation that not only results in negative impacts onwate$ids alld other wildliJe, but also on the Iisht]rcnselves (Box 5.14. ways o{ avoiding dris prol>tem are given in Box 5.18.

All ioo often, howev€r, fish are stocked to such a

dpnsit) that d s eildnd .wrl.he. lo an alSdl-domi-nated system, with flequent algal blooms, turbidB aler. little aqudtic planl groB lh and reduction.in the diversiq/ o{ bodl invertetrate and vertebmte-pe.ies divcrsib . An effe, tj\ p method ofrestoringsuch wetlands has proven to be large-scale fishremoval, partlcula{ly of addt bottom fe€ding spe-

cies such as b{eam and carp (c.8. through tempo-rary drainage, trapping or electro-{ishing). Themethod is thought to work as follows (aJtff Moss1983, McQueen 1990):

. when fsh are renoved, 9razing cladocerans (water rlea9can ndrcase n abundance and reduce phytoplankton com-

munilies, aLlow ng betler ghl penetration and lhus stimu-

alinq aquatic plant orowlh irom lhe exisl nq seed bank.

. lhe remova of lsh means lhat lhd lake bed sedimenls are

ess d slurbed and lhal inorganic panl nuliient re-cycLing

is slowed down. The clearer less eutroph c waler cond -tions lhen favour submerged aquatc planl 9rowlh thal n

lurn w ll supporl a nore diverse nvertebrate communiiy

and aqual c avifauna.

Following fish removal and the re estabLishment

of a healthy aquatic system, a balanced Iish popn-lation can be rc-established, which should be com-posed of a range of nativ€ species. cuidelines forecologically sustainable fish stock densities are

provided in Box 5.18.

Owing to strong angling intercsts or practical con-straints. large-scale fish-removal to restorewetlands from algae-dominatcd systems may notbe possible. In such circumstances, brushwoodbundles staked in the lake margins cafl act as ref-uges from fish predation for large cladocerarc (e.8.

Di4rnrlz species) which move out into oien waterat night and crop the planktonic algal populations(Moss 1983). Combined with the careful application of barley straw (see section 5.3.1.1), this mayrestore !\dter( Id-riL) dnd dquali.pldnl conrnuni-ties to some extent.

Apait from potential adverse effects on wetlandand waterbirds, it is important to acknowledgcsubstantial dsks to the fishery itself from an intm-sive strrcking policy. Many of these risks arise fromthe health status oI the stocked {ish. In dlis regard,the Environmeni Agency has produced a usetulleaflet {or fishery rnanagels: Buyet Beuarc - your

Cuidr k S/ocking Fish: Cnnse ts under 0E Salnoand Frcshuatet Fisheries A.l 1975 (EA 1996). Imported {ish are covered by EU legislation undertheir {ish healdr regime aimed at the preventioEintroduction and spread of sedous {ish diseases.

It is all too easy to unwittingly introduce diseases

and parasites into previously healthy fish stocks.Diseases such as spdng viremia of cary (SVg canwipe out native stocks if inkoduced into naturalwaters. Many other diseases aIId parasites are liable to be introduced via this rcute. Although mostnon-native parasites would be unlikely to com-plete then Lfe cyd€s and therefore gain a hold inBdtish waters, some have managed to do so withdisashous rcsults for native fish srocks.lf a {inal decision to stock a waterbody G made,relevant legal constaints (Box 5.19) and Sood-practice guid€Iin€s (Boa 5.18) should be followed. I{ asitc is an SSSI then consultation with the apprG

FOP RECREAT/ON & WA|FPB|RD CONSERYAT/ON

95

95

stantial risk to receiving wate$, espe.ia]ly on riversystems where diseases and parasites can easilysFead.

ArI altemative approach ro Iish stocking is themanagement of habitat to improve rhe heedingsuccess of fish already Fesent. This potentiallycaries lower financial as well as environmcntalcosts (NId{ 1994b).

The stocking of waterbirds for shooting is com-monly practised in many counfties, h1t it imposesa mlmber o{ potential risks to conseflation inter-ests, including (after Callaghali et a|.1995,199n:

. a leriig ihe ecology and qenotype ot witd stocks.

prom0ting and inlroducinq dsease amonost wtd stocks

d .lt ol 10 elergy d,1aa !s wilr.1wel ands, wth associaled a teralons ro cofrmun ly struc-

priate countly conselvation agencies willalso bercquired. Health checks on consignments of fishto be stockedwilbe required where there is a sub,

Considering this, er'aterbird srocking should bediscouraged wherever possible, and where ir con-tinues it should be pmctised sensirively and in-sp€ction oI birds for disease prjor to releas€ shouldbe encouraged.

Management for both angling and shooting com-monly involves the control oI predators. Wherethese are introduced predato$, such as mh* inthe UK, this has obvious berefits for waterbtuds

MANAoEMENT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERA/RO CANSEPVAT/ON

and other wildlife. But native prcdatoE are also

commonly controlle4 such as pike, foxes andpiscivorous birds.

A Sreat deal of attention has recently been giv€n tolhe mandSemert of pis.i! Lrrouibird! in Lurope inresponse lo concpms from fi,her\ and angling in-terests. In panicular, [he European comomntpopulation continues to grow and spread in manycountries. In response/ a European Action PIan

under the Bonn Convention has been prepared,

which includes methods to limit bird numberc(&om Bregnballe .f nl. 194:

E

;

prevenling new tree-nesting colon es becom ng

eslab shed by d sturb ig birds al lhe ear iesl phases of

breed ng and/or shooling ndividuas.

cuilins neslinq lrees and dhturbing breeding b rds.

. reducing reproducive oulput by trealing eggs and/or

. inlroducinq a huntr0 seasor

All of these have already been used in most coun-tries at some time, but success has been mixed andmurh Jepend. on local condrLions tfor funher in-Iormation see van Eerden rt dl. 1995j Baccetii &Cherubini 1997, van Dam & Asbirk 1997,Grornadzki & Gromadzka 1997).

At the site scalc, a se es oI stcps should be takento manage conflict between piscivorous birds andfisheies/angling (Box 5.20). Attempts to scare

birds are usualy o{ timited success, since the birdssoon become habituated. Also, spe.ial govemmentlicenses are required to kill the birds or take thejreggs (but not to scare in the UK) in most countietand drese arc usually issued to compl€ment scar

ing. Rope bangers, gas guns, scar.e.nrws and dlrm-mies can be used ai small ponds and fish farms orwhere Fedatory bnds are concentrated on largewaters,Ior instance, close to fish-reanin8 cates.

Altematively, manaSement can focus on the fishsiocks, which oIIers scope for development. For

example, at Rutland Water (England) an incleasein the size of stocked rainbow tout reducedcormorant predation and injury to {ish andimprowed angler satisfaction due to increasedcatches of largcr fish (T. Appleior! pers- comnl.).HowF! er..t.,, ljng moreor larger fish ha. obuou:coct rmpti.alronj (or {r.hpry ownet.. lncrea.iJ)S

habitat complexity, thus providing more shelter

and increased invertebrate {ood tesourccs for fish,i.po..ibly a promirms rA hnique. O\ crill rhere i.grcat scope for testing the ellicacy of suchtechniques in Britain.

Al$ough the pdmary aim of the managem!'nt o{bothlish and Balerbird! for rpcrFdliondl d.tr\ ities

FOR RECREAT/AN & WATERA/RO CANSEPVAT|ON

97

9A

is not to promote a natural assemblage of speciestypical o{ the region (which arises {romapprcpdat€ habitat rnanag€ment see e.& Box 5.14),responsible recreationmaragers should considexthis to be at least a secondary objective. This is thesurest way of ensuing a healthy wetland system,and hence the guarantee of tuture Breation arldwildtife rcsource.

5.3.1.4 Monitoriry & research

Preventing and reducing con{lict betweenwaterbirds and recreation is h€avily dependenton adequate monito ng and resea{ch, so thatinformed decisions can be made. However,pmedures for monito nS, for example, visitoruse and characteristics and the state of theenvironrnent at the site level are weakSenerally (Elson et a/. 1995). Even very basicmonitoring and r"-earch of the inleraclionsbetween waterbirds and recreation ca]l providevaluable insights to management issues and helpguide approp ate decisions.

5.3. 1.5 Spatial zonation

Spatial zonation of human activities is animportant management technique that isparticularly applicable to recreation andwaterbirds. Largely depending on the size of th€site and activity in question and the availability ofother sites nearb, zones may need to indude €ntnesites or parts thereof.

It is advantageous to take a strategic view ofzonation on aregional as wel as at site level. Suchan approach, taken by Northumbdan Water, wasde{-ribed b) \prdy (lqq4 All rhe reservoir. inthe region were assessed {or their conservationvahe (habitats and birds) and for their suitabilityand potential for recreation. Research was alsocarried out on the disturbance caused byrecreation to aid the zonation process. As a resultthe most disturbinS activities were concenhatedon a large reservoir of limited wildli{e vahe,whereas r€oeation was stopped at a site whichwas sensitive to disturbance and of highconsewation value. On other waters, recreationwas zoned at the individual sit€ level.

The highly migratory nature of most waterbirdpopulations means that safeguarding waterbirdpopulations requires networks of protected sit€s,often involving different habitats and altemativeor emergency sites. BreakinS links in such net-

workshas potentially{ar-rcachingconsequencesfor the sulvival of migratory populations.Conseftation measues were initially {ocused onthe protection of bird species but it is s€U-evid€ntthat such measures must be rooted in habitatconservatiorL since without the maintenance o{.uilable hdbitdt mo.aic. dnd networL,.pcri."conservation measures will not be effective(Davidson & Stroud 1996).

UANA6EMENT FOR RECREAT/AN & WATERB/RD CONSERYAT/ON

ln zones set aside for waterbirds (either sites orparts thercoo, it is c tical to ensure that the qual-ity of the habitat prcvides adequately for the targetspeci€s, €specially with reSard to feedin& nesting,roosting and moulting. Setting-aside the nearestwater body irespective of its ecological character-istics is clearly not sufficient to provide an ad-equate refuge.

Large wedands with convoluted edges alld hid-den bays provide most scope {or spatial zoning o{activities within a site. Bickmor€ & Larard (1989)

discuss the reconstruction o{ wetland habitats indevelopment schemes and Fovide an example ofa pmposed water park following gravel extactiondesigned in an attempt to reduce potential con-flicts. Their plan incoryorates zones for natule con-servation, dinghy sailin& sail boarding, a towedwaler.Ii rLrn. a rowing and sprint cinoeingcourse, a maina and central facilities.

I I is d Jf r, ulr lo f ro\ ide Senerdl advi.e on,/onin8sinc€ mally key aspects arc related to individualsite constraints. l{owever, some attention has beengiven to guidance on the d€sign o{ distu$ance-fte€ areas for waterbilds, particularly tlleir siz€ andshape. Hill er /l1. (1994 quote a notional size of200ha for a stillwater capable o{ supporting fixedspatral or rotatronal zoning of activities thoughthe year, although they emphasise the fact that lit-de research has been done on this topic. They alsonote that restrction of multiple-use amenity ac-

tivities, ptus adequate conservation provision tosites of 200 ha or larger would mean that therewould probab\ be fewpr t}'dn l0.u.h warFr. inthe UK (see Box 5.8 for an example of successfulzonation at one of these sites). The area requiredfor indiudiual recreahonal activity varies with theamount of disturbance it causes. This va es be-tween 2 ha for angling to 15-20 ha for more dis-turbing activities such as water skiing and sailing(Splay1994.

meaning that much c,{ t}rc retuge is acting as a bufier/,one ltis vrsuJ s.reen ma) mdlc dn othprh ise

rather small rcfuge acceptable to the ducks andone recommendation arising from the study is 1o

enhr8e the -an.tudry and to inLreJ\e screerinSby building more woorled islands. Grice (1990)

notes that, within Greater London, all other sitesof national importance aor moulting tufted duckar€ faily large reservoirs with no sailing.

Fox & Madsen (1994 use the distance at which abird takes fli8ht when approached by a human(known as the "escape flight distance") to establish optimal retuge sizes and shapes. They descdb€three types oI refuge area:

. core refuge (where vi ually all disrribut onal eflecrs on

bnds due lo dislurbance are ex.luded).

. bufier zone (wheG activilles arc poscribed bur where dis-

turbance eIfecls iiom oulsde lhe area a.e still manilesr).

. the rest of the rcserve (wherc various recreational actvl

ties lake place under managemenl).

From their studies, Fox & Madsen (1994 concludethe following

. re,uSia should be as arue as posslble and siled on hgh qualily

habital - laking into accounl targel species concernsd and

paidcularly then feedlnq and bosling rcquiremenls

. reluoe size and shape musl effectivelv Drolecl bnds lionbolh p.evailing and potenlia lorms of dsturbancei il should

have a m nimum diameler oi three limes the escape I ghl

d slance ol lhe mosl sensitive species present

. lhe mosl eliective retusia wiL be oi rcgu ar tound/square)shape, becauso lhe corc area is bufiered consistenlly by a

relalively ong escape dislance, minimis ng lhe potenl al

for disturbing iniluences along ihe edges. Long ih n reiuqia

the.eiore, wil lend to be disproporlionalely alfected by

such edg€ eifecls, as w sl nqs ol sma er reiug a. A tew

larg€ relug a each wth qood habtal qua iy are, thereiore,

belter than more numerous smaller ones.

99

None$eless, there are many successful instancesof spatial zoning on smaler wetlands. For exam- ' anv nnor core area ot a leiuge shou d be at easl as wide

Ple,Grice(1990)producedavaluablesfudyofthendiametelaslheescapeilighldistanceollhemostI€a Valey Broadwat$ Lake (Mid-Colne Valley sen8rt v6 specres'

SSSI; England) where an approdmately squaresanctuary area of arcund 450 metres each side similar Suidelinesdeveloped with parti'ular ref-

provides a refuge for500+ moultingtuJted ducks erencetowildfowling (Box5 21) set out best prac-. tice thdt is Drobabh more senerdllv aDDltrable torrom saxljlg 4.nflry.

islands with ta]l alder tlees tllat provide additional retu8e desiSn'

visml screening ftom sailin8. Wher saiting is tak-ingptace tlrebnctsmove awaylromtheboats down using.studies of escape fli8ht distance' Box 5 21

to the southem en.l of the retuge behind islands, provides a rough indication olidealrefuge diam

MANAGEUENT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATEPB|PD CANSERVAflON

Box 5.21: Guidetines for the provision ofrefuges for waterfowI lfro{ EN/BAsc 19951

. . . idemity allaurrdnt:efuges and.rlosls - rie lirst ,.clone ior recognisod relrge eFds:ar leasl50% oi 116 a'€a Lsed oy fe n"inwaGdowl coicentiatiohs shdulii be i;ee ft.m th-"'

'influenee ol shdotinq and lherefoie povisionailv

selecled as refuges. Prinsipal consideEiionsshould be given lo specios $hich occur i0

, . Nalonally .or liieinaliolially. impprtant numberc on

tiori ot habiirhir,ithin a sit€'s

loo'

bkds accommodated wiihin lhem lo be unaJlected

by soirrces oI disludance rrom ouiside - wilh

etels {or various waterbird species. Despite theobvious problerns with interpretation o{ flight dis-tances Irom these vanious siudies, it is possible to

8dn dn rmPrcsron of ureful rpruge.np. l^r ! ari.ous wate$irds troth ir1 teffestrial and aquatic situ,ations. For areas where walkers disturb ducks, rL+uge diameters of around a kilometre appear approp ate. Where diving ducks arc disturbed onwater by boats or wintenng feeding goose flocksare distu rbed by nearby roads or by shooting, ref-uge sizes of 1-2km may be more appropriate.Clearly, these figurcs are based upon open sites,the provision of scrcening or floating islands canenablc smallerlL'tuges to be develop€d, althoughI,,IANAGEMENT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATFRE|RD

it should be remembered thnt aggregations of wintedng

'\,aterbirds prefer large open warerbodies

(Tuite cf dl. 1984).

Witll regard to bait collection for angling on ihecoast, spatial zonation may also prove e{{ective.The collection of baii has been shown to disturbwatlybirds to an unaccc'ptable degree, and to causechanges in coastal ecology. To alleviate the prob-lem, Fowler (1992) recommended the inboductionof zoning to ensurc the sustainable cropping ofthe bait sp€cics, whilst also limiting habitai deg-radation and disturbance. AIso, the collection of'peeler' and 'so{t' crabs is facilitatcd in muddyestuaries by artiJicial cover (boards, car tyres, df..)which crabs hide under and from whicl rhey caneasily be caught. Perhaps ftis concept could bee\lended ,o orhpr.itc. and .m ure\fpr-rvc. en\ i-ronmentaly acceptablc Iorm of 'sheltel devisedfor people haffcsting crabs. Zoning of bait collec-tiorl on the coasi should be encouraged amongstangling clubs and integrated into the process oF

Coastal Zone Management (see Box 5.6 ancl5-7).

Spatial zoning of water sports is feasible on largeinland water complexes such as the NorfolkBroads (England), River Shannon (Irelard) andLoch Ness (ftodand). Indeed, there have beenmany successtul attempts at zonation of water-craft. For example, at Chew Valey Lake (A\,o&England), ihe development o{ a sailing club hadlittlc impact on watelbirds since it was caretullyconfined to a limited deep-water zone (Vinicombe1975). This also appeaE tobe the cas€ atRutlarldWater (England) (Appleton 1996). On linear waterway. hohp!er .u(h d.(drdl. .patial /oningis often impractical (Murphy ri a/. 1995). Gosschamel zorinS can, however, be used on widerivers to protect se.nsitive areas, such as reed beds,md, r^phvte, ommunirie. or fi.h FD hdt-iu t5.

The siting o{ visitor faciliiies can also be us€d tospatially zone activities effectively. For example,The Peak Distuict Park ]oint Plaming Board (Eng,Iand) hav€ developed p1.uE to Sain a8r€emcntsbetween landowneE, {aJmers, conseNation andaccess organisations on a strategy for pathwayplarmin& including the sitin8 of car parks, toitets,

'lrle. dnd inJ,,rm"tion hodrd.. One\'f lh( dirn! -'to Buide walkers away from sensitive wildlife areas, particularly breeding golden plov!'rs (see e.g.

Yalden & Yalden 1989). On the Chatswodh Es-tate (Entla]ld) the concept oF'access coridors' hasbeen promote4 which also aims to cl]allnel walk-els away tuom sensitivc wildlife areas.

consider noililying wildfoulinq pracllces on theI silei e.g.,aliekiioi h ieinpo.al pattems, rclaiional,. .refusest vdluntary Bslrainl 6tc,:

lol

5.3.1.6 Tcmporal zonalion

Temporal zonation involves restrictions on the timeduring which all activity can be pmctised. Al-though in general it is less effective than spatialzoflation, it is noneth€less useful iI used wisely.Restrictlons can be placed o& {or example, thehours or seasons dudng which an activity can bepmcticed. With regard to recreation on wetlands,tempoml zonation is most evident in shooting andfishin8. However, a$eements to curtail certainactivities at sensitive times can be arrang€d andare becoming more common. For example,{ollowing the work oI Northumtrian Water andWesterberg et ni. (19%), sailing was flot allowedon one reseryoir important for wintering biidsduring the winter months. On another site anaSreement w.,\ rea(hcd lo.uaarl wdler+Lm8at the time when breedinB Wigeon were

In Bdtain, there was taditionally a close season

for stillwater coarse fishin8 ruming from 15 Marchto 15 June each year, and research has showr tha t

this was efI€ctive at maintaining higher mmb€rsof breeding birds than would tl€ the case withoutthe dos€ season (r.8. Tydeman 192- However, thisstatutory ban has r€ccntly becn abolishc4 excepton ccytain S.SSIS. Fortunately, many environmen-tal1y rcsponsible fishing dubs have decided to re-tain the traditional closed season, so as to 'rest' thefishery and to give wateEide nesting birds a chanceto breed. Also, fishing seasons at other sites havebeen tailored to reduce impact on importantwaterbird concertrations. For example, at llandeEMoss (ftodand) temporal zoning o{ game {ishingminimises angler disturbance to an internation-ally important roost of pink-footed geese (Irritcharddf al. 1992) (see also Box 5.23).

Shooting seasons have been long established inmany countries as a mealls oI reducing impact onqua[y species. Genemly speakin& shootingshould not t egin until all juvenile waterbirds havefledged (which in Eu-rope coresponds to Septe1n-

ber in the north-east and tuober in the south-west)and should close b€{ore distrubance significandyaffccts heedinS srccess (which roughly co e-

ANAAfl.tfNl raR Rl cRrAltaN & walLRatRD c0tuqtPvr'ltoN

t02

sponds to the end of Jamary for most species inX ope). Many counrries, however e'mploli sea

sons that occuf well outsidc thesc d ates, Ior erarLplp rhere i. ro ( l..c \.a-,,n in lol.lfd dnd in L,ermany shooLing occurc in every month except Mali(Callabhan .r n/ loqc loo4 ( lFdrl). lhprp r\ d

rced for European counties to revjse shooting sea-.on5'orh-r the\.lreo".eJonchd-rc.oloBi,dlfrin-ciples and are intemationally compatible.

ln addition to h aditional closed seasons in the UK(and similarly insome otltrparts of EuropLJ, leg-islation enables a temporary su spensjon of shoot-hg during'emergency pe od s'. This has alloweda mechanism b be developed in the UK Ior sus-pcnding wat'rbird shooting during periods o{ prolonged se.verc winter weather. Under cu rrent pro-cedures, voluntary restnint is caled for a{ter sevendays ard a statutory ban imposed aJter 14 days ofcontinuous Ireezing weather. Depending on wheretheseJlherF l-1,*l -F\pre. l-hrb"rmd\.o\erLr'B-land and Wales, Scotland or the l^.llole of Bdtain.It lasts for seven days a fter $e amelioration of theweather. The ban is imposed in partiL'ular to avoiduffEcessary disturbance to both quarry and non-quany species of waterfowl, as well as to avoidexcessive shooting bags oI quarry species wherethese suffer Irom lack of {ood. The imposition ofbarls is reviewed by Siroud (1992a). As yet, thereb no internauonal -oorJination oI .u.h bdrL inEu rope, although it wolnd be wise so as to preveni

poteniial incrcases in harest o{ birds displacedIrom iced-up neishborins regons.

Shooting at nighi can senously disturb roostingwaterbirds (Mudge 1989) a]ld is ther€{ore bamedin most developed counties, although not Britain.Many anghlg clubs have bamed night fishing ontheir waters althouth it is allowed in some cifcum-.ldr,. e...n,e rr t.r I e\ runelo,at,h-ome\pe.ip\

5-3-2 Patticipant & eq ipncnt mdndgenent

5.3.2.1 (odes of conduct

ln May 199 1, the Central Council Ior Physical Rec-

reatio& a fom]n for recreaLiona I goveming bodicsin England, published a policy staieme'nt on sportand the environmeni, in which it urged its corstituent bodics to dcvebp codes oI practice whichpromoted susiainable use oI the environment.Many gov!'ming bodies of recreaiion ha\.e nowdeveloped su ch cod es in an aitempt to reduce theimpact oi their activity on the environment (Box5.24). Ihese vary in qualit, and in general dealwith operational, legal and safety issu€s, whil€environmental issues are less tully covered. Also,thevigourwith which goveming bodiespromoteiheir codes varies greatly (Elson .f 01. 1995). Thesc. ode.arc ea.\ anJ (h"dp to produ. p. dnd lhere i.widesprcad e\.idence that such voluntary meth-ods can be an effective wa1, of managing recrea-ttu& palticularly because lack ofcoercioneliciis a

positivc response Irom affiliated participants(Elson ct al. 1995). Fishing owners can draw up oradopt codes and demand that lesse€s follow them.This can be complemented through education andinteryretation (section 5.3.2.3) and parrolling (sec-

tion 5.3.2.5). The main problem arises with non-afiiliated pa icipants, who are not bound in anyway bv the codes and may noteven be aware theyexist. AIso, codes can soon b{ome ouFdated withchanSes in Iaw, polic), ard technology.

Supplemental. codes for particular regions, t]"esof sites or environments can be rcetul, aq candetailed siteievel codes. For example, on theCroucl Estuary (England) codes of pracLice have

rumoled "-el:p.,li. irg anrong.l hrlrr .l;er-thusiasts, which has been parLicllarly successrul(Elson ct"l.199s).

5.3.2.2 Compensalion

lndivi.luals, or the organisations to which thelrbelong, c;ul be nude to compensate Ior then dam-

MANAAEMENT FOR RECREAT|ON & WATERB/RA CONSERYAT/ON

aging activities (the "polluter pays" pdnciple).This can be in the lonn of:

provision of a lernative hab tal

The fiIst is the most commor y used, since it is th€easiesi to establish a]ld manage. But it can oftenbe ineffective if not adequately advertised and ejl-{orced, or if the magnitude of the penalty is insuf-{icient. The other two compensation schemes mayoffer scope for development but as yet are notwidely used in recreation management on andaround wetlands. The use could include, Iorexample, an8ling clubs being charged to dredgefishinB swims on a penodic basis to rcmove dis-carded tackle and other litter or through the pro-vision a]Id maintenance oI fishing platfoms (or'pcgs ) n areas rulferirg hom bdrl^ideero-ion.In one major example, the flooding of Cardiff Bay,d1e scheme was allowed to go al€ad a{ter a rom-mitment had been made to deate other wetlandsareas in the reSion as compensation. Similarly, insensitive ar€as suffering from disturbance, rcrrea-tional bodies can be made to tund, for example,landJormin8 to create scleens. And in areas wherethere has been an iretrievable loss of habitat qual-ity, they can be charged to {und the provision o{altemative habiiat, either within the site or as drextension to ii. The possibilities are vaied, but

103

MANAGEMENT FOR RECREATlAN & WATERR/PD CONSERlAT/ON

104

shoutd be managed in a sensitive way thatavoids conflict.

5.3.2.3 Educatior and interpretation

Education and interpretation are probably th€most under-used methods for reducing conflictbetween recreation and wate$ ds, butones thatcan be effective in substantially reducing or rcmov-ing most o{ the associated problerns. For example,huntinS mortality of the globally thrcatmed andstrictly prote.ted freckled duck of Austlalia wasreduced signficandy in pan through the estab-Iishment o{wate ovi identification tests {or hunt-els (using videos) along with othex education ma-terial (see Callaghan ef nl- 1995, 1997 for furtherdiscussion).

To be effective, caleJul thought and planning needs

to be given to the twe oI eduGtion and interpreta-tion media to be used and the messages to be de-livered. Simply Foducing a ftee leaflet, {or exam-ple, is not a guarantee that anybody will read itand research shows that the contary is usualythe rule (Ham 1992).

MANAA IENT FOR RECREAT/ON & WATERR/RD

Thankf ully, envnonmental interyretation has de-veloped rapidly in recent y€ars, most notably inthe USA. A signiJicant result has been the produc-tion of a number o{ excelent Buidebooks that pro-vide a wide mnge of ideas {or the management ofreseation on and around wetlands (e.3. Hawkins1991; Ilanr.1992).

Encouragingly, experience has shown that inmany cases even very modest budgets can fu]ldthe prodrction o{ hi8h]y effective interpretatior!given caretul planning (Ham 1992). For example,a series of signs Ied to an cstimated 90 % reductionin lhedcl:idcntJl di.turbance of nc.hng.la\ oniangebes at a scottish site (NCC/RSPB 1988). See

also Box 5.25.

5.3.2-4 Participart limitation

Wctl d srrcs rndy hd\p d l}Ire.hold or .arr) m8capacity beyond which the intensity of recreationcauses environmental damag€. Once all othermanagement techniqres have been exhausted,techniques should t€ rsed to redrce the numberoI participants prusuing an activity to below thethreshold level. Leisure activities tend to lendthemselves well to this approach, partiolarly aismaller sites or in areas wiih rcst cted access

points. Limitation o{ participants is comrnonlyused in anglin& shootin8 and water sports, and isolten imposed volmtarily by the participants them-selves. For example, organized hunting groupscomrnonly restrict pafticipant numbers to impnrvehunting success.

In additio& time tickets are being used increas-ingly, whereby participants are limited to a pedodo{ time during which they pursue a particular ac-tivit). nJ. hds the added rdvanlagc of allowinga geater number of participants in total, and hencesharing tlrc value o{ wetlands more equitably.

5.3.2.5Patrolling

Many o{ the managemmt tecflniques described inthis chapter can only be eflective if supported byadequate patrolling. In particular, this is relevantto spatial and temporal zonatio& codes of con-du.l. parti( ip t limitdtion.md rcgulatiunofre.-reational equipment. However, patolling can beexpensive and often needs to be carried out int!'n-.i\elv .rl nle. *ral attrdcl larSe numbers of \ i.itoIS. Hence, budget constraints often limit the eI{ectiveness o{ patrols. A possible affwer to this

Foblem is voluntary wardening. For example, on

fie Dee Estuary (England) volunteers were er istedto intercept and ialk to inJormal re.reation partici-pants, especially on very high tid€s when the beachwas narow and fie people most likely to walkclose to roosting shorebirds. Tleydisrributcd L\-planatory leaflets on bird disturbance and askedpeople to use pathways behind the beacl out oIsight oI the birds 6nby ef d7. 1993). The numbe$ul.horFbirdr incrca.eJ, d.ord thenu]nh-F of viii-brs and types of beach rccreation. It reftiru pos-sible that other Factors, perhaps operating at theh hol(..c.luar) -calc. l:aLr'ed lhe in(rea,e in-horeb rJs Howerer. lhe volLrntary wardcninBand public educational programme imFoved puE1ic perception oI the birds and thei rcosting needs.

5.3 -2.6 Restriction/modi ficalion oi equipmcnt

Rest ction and/or modification of ihe us€ and t}})eof recreational equipment are often necessary toreduce problems for waterbirds and other wild-Iife, in particular amidst rapid technological ad-ran.e. for*"mplc.cle.tricaX) poBe'cdengine"on boats are being introduced on some waterwayswhere adequate battery chargirg Iacilities areavailable. These cause no direc t pollution and are

popular with boat users because of their quiet op-eration. Eatteries need to be reclarged every 2-3days, but this frequency should be le.ngthened withprogress in battery tedlnolo8y gWAAC 1983; NRA.1994b). AIso, short,Irrll bows produce high waves,and so the use of 1ong, Iine bows ca]l reduce wavewash without futher restdctions on boat speed.However, irespective of h11ll desi8n, speeds be-yond 5 mph on rivers and canals cause waves lik€lyto darnage banks (and moored craft) NnA 19%b).

In many countries, the poisoning of waterbirdsftom spent Bunshot pellets and discarded fishingweights have been a high profile issue over recentyears. Despite considerable effort to manage fiisproblem, the only proven solution is a statutoryban on the sale oI lead shot with a correspondingrcplacement by nontoic alterratives. Fortunatel,the latter are widely available at reasonable cost,so there is little excuse for the continued use oflead shot in angling and shooting. But even fol-Iowin8 traffition to flon-todc altematives, leadshot remains in wetland sediments for many years.

Hence, lead poisoningwill only disappcarslowl,giv!'n the pradical impossibilitr, of removing it

105

:,1 r

MANAAEMENT FOR RECR{AT/ON & WATERBlRD CONSERYAT/ON

ilr

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

lo5

ln response to growing public and political con-cem tor the environmcn t, therc dje now e\len-rveIrameworks of statutory and non-statutory meas-ures for the conservation of waterbirds andr /etlands in most developed countries, and to anincreasing extent in developing countries. Rec-rcation on and aromd wetlands has affected andimpacted on waterbirds (and other wildlife) in avariety of neSative ways and to various degees.At the same time, at rnany sites, the careful de-sitn, ueation and managemmt of habitat haveresulted in benefits for both wildlife and recrea-tional userc (e.& Appleton 1993). Ihe demand forrecreation will continue to increase as hururpopulations and their affluence grows, and gov-€mment and private compani€s see the valu€ topmple s heal*r and theh own image of encoulag-ing dcce\s dnd patir ipalion in sport. Resolvingthe numemus problems is neither easy nor cheap.Nonetheless, we need to conserve and where possible erftance the pl€sert wetland resolfce so thatpresent and future generations may reap the nu-

A wide varief, of management tecluriques areavailable for inteFating recreation and wate$irdcorl5€rvalion. A few have been $e.ubjeclot riSor-ous scientific studies, such as spatial zonation toreduce shooting disturbance (e.8. Madsen198a&b), but most others have been given littleobiective soutiny, for eyample the us€ of education and interpretation to promote b€st practiceon a voluntary basis. Thus, management willof-ten be based on inad€quate infomntion and hencea good deal of praSmatism. But {rom a more opti-mistic point oI view, there is considemble scopefor experimental manaSement to fill knowledgegaps and significantly advance ecologically sus-tainable recreation.

Encouagingly, "win : win" scenarios in recrea-tion and waterbird conservation are increasintlyevident. For example, shooting and conservation

CONCLUS/ONs AND RECOMMENDAT!ONS

bodies in Denmark have agreed the establishmentof a netwoik oI55 waterfowl retuges that shouldimFovebothhuntingandwate owlconselvati(nropportunities (see Callad1an et aL 1995,1W7 {.}tdiscussion). Also, there ar€ rnany examples o{ recrcation bodies instigating wetland creatiory restoration and protection programmes. and whereth€se are managed sensitively there are often sub-stantial benefits to waterbirds and other wildlife.

Recognising growing commitment to ecologicallysustainable recreation on and around wetlands.we make the following r€conrmerdations:

M.nagemoit framework

. plann ng and managemenl oi wettands shoutd be fu y inle-graled w Ih al re evant po icies to reduce conf icl,andoplimise the vaue ol lhese habtats for both recreation and

. (ldkeholde..olrL ta iors ard irlo,/pr" at a[ (rass.

an essential eenenl of obta n ng consensusi

. the growlh of rccreation shoutd be managed and evatualod

carefully so lhat ils eliecls and ihpacls on waterbirds and

oiher wild le are m nimised in pa cuar lhrough coslben-ell analyses and envronmeniat tmpact assessmenls thatncorporale lhe besl posslbte env ronmentat nformaton

. the Precaulonary Pr nciple shoutd b6 apptied where thereis uncertai0ly and pote.tia ty serious risks lo waterbndsand olher wild le from recrealion

. management should focus on creating conditions typicat ofthe region and hence habiiar thal can suppo a naluratassefiblage of fo.a and fauna

. management shoud avoid crealing arge areas of habtatlailored lo suit a few larqet species:

. the applicalion of ferllizers and ifie in an attempt to tn-

crease produclivity and pH shoud be avoided.

conlm of veselaton should be limiled as much as poss-

ble and conlined lo ate summer and .ulumn:

waler leves should be manipulaled sensitively, idealD by

mimickins nalural conditionsl

lhe app icalion ol poisons, such as pkccides and herb-

cides, should be avoided as far as possible;

- regular removal of adu t fish, parlicularly

bollom{eedinq speces, where hi!h slock donsil€s

danage habilalsi

- awldance of stock ng hat rcquiEs additjonal

management, sudr as fenilzer appllcalion or tueding

- no rc eas ol non nalive species (wilh the

except on oI rainbow l@ul in some cncumslances)

in agae-dominaled wetlands, temporary fish{emova should

be considered, or otherwise lhe addit on o, subm,Arqed

brush{,ood bundlos comb ned wlh the carelul app calion

where conrlcl beiween piscivorous birds and Iishery/an-

gling nieresrs exists, aclions should include:

- seeking advice lrom e.g. oEFRA or the

Env ronment Agency;

' contirmalion lhal a real problem exisls;

' quanlilication oi the scae oi the probeml

' measuremenl or eslimalion of variables lhatmay atrecl the problem from a baseline beiore lt arose;

- where poss b e, man pulalion ol variabes

olher lhan bnd numbers lhai may be lhe cause ol lhe

- when il !s beyond reasonable doubl thal

piscivorous bnds are the cause ol lhe problem,

management shoold locus on Ish slocks (e.9. slock

ng of larger lish or slock ng during I mes ol lowest

densities or piscivorous bnd, and/or b rds (e.9. scar

in9 using gun+hots, Ilares, boals, elc., or shooting

indivldoals Ia governmenl licence is needed n noncounlres, includ ng Brita nl).

. bank rcveimeni should use nalura malerials such as sillow or alder shere possible;

. bufier zones should be created wherever poss ble, espe-

cialy borde nq sensilive areas ( nc ud ng whole siler.

. wetlands should be desgned lo reduce the likeLihood of

conllicl belueen reqealion and lrvalerbirds, Ior example

- habrlal coffidors (lo facililate wildli,e

movemenl aoioss recrcaliona areadl

' isands, channels, eadh mounds (bunds),

bays, hedges and peninsulas (lo hep zone aclivilies

and reduce dislurbance).

. wherever poss b e, management of species shou d be

based at the popualion level, in padicular slh a locus on

perods of slress in the .nnual cycle;

. nlroducton of exolic species should be slopped except ln

sp€ciaL circunslances, such as rainbow iroui in enclosed

walers, and populations lhal have a sen tiom this activly

should b€ conlrolled in problem areas;

. slocking ol spoci6s should be discouraged, and populations

lhat have arisen liom this aclivi(y shou d be conlro led ii

. ralher lhan stocking fish, managemeni of habllal lo im-

prov6 lhe breeding success ol lsh akeady prcsent should

10,

Monitoring .id research

. sci€ntisrs should embrace guidance on improviig msearch

methods and standards lor research on r€creational elfecrs

and lmpacts (see Box 6.i,6.,2).

. ihe research aSenda is extensive bul research lhai wil

rssoh n better infomalion for plannerc and wetland man

agers in ihe future shou d be a h gh prority for research

Goe sussesied topics in Bor 6 2).

sh€re fish slock n9 is planned, aclions shou d include: Spalial zonation

- atianmeni of wltGn consenl from lhe

appropriale autho ty e.g. lhe Envnonment Agency in

- ai es*ssrent ot what soecies and numbeB

- reslriclion to slockinq lhce species presnl;

prevenlion oi slock ng at a scale thai causes

adverse ellecls on nalve fora and fauna:

only slocking botlom-feeding lish, such as

bream and carp, 6t ow densities (or not at all)l

insurance lhal pedatory lish are pan of th€

iish communlty where possiblol

,oning lor borh consetoslon and recrcallon should be al a

slmlogic regional level as sell as 31 sile leve

zoning of p1016cled sites crlical Ior the mainlenance of

waterb rd populations should be expanded and maintanedi

zones sel asids ior walerbirds should contain habitat rhal

provdes adequalely lor lheir needs, especally with re

Oard to feedinO nestinO, mos(inO and mou linqi

CONC/IJSlONg r'ND PFCOUMFNDA.|ONS

nclude specles ar risk, aspeci of theh odltogy

toa

Box 6.2: Research to address the effects/impacts of re.reation on waterbirds

Furlher sludie6 are requied that:

'e.dii9 r{e, ard .rve, gd'e rte .roieul ehecrs,:trpr(l) ot

CONCIUS|ONS AND RECOMMENDAT/ONE

. dislurbance-lree zones should be as large as poss ble. or financial penalties oi adequato moasurej

al l6asl three limes lhe esc.pe flght d stance of lhe mosl adve semenl and enforcemenli

sensilve species preseni {see Box 5.21)t - Iull rcsloralion of damaged areas;- provision oi aliernallve adequale habilal.

. disturbancejree zones shou d be c rcular (as opposed to

inear) and the nner corc area should be ai easl as side n Educatlon and intorprolationd.arere' as lhe es(ape rhqll d sldrce ol he rosl sers -

tive species presenl (see 8ox 5.21); . edocalion and inlerprelalion should be encouraged aid the

media and messages us6d should be planned careiuly.. where lhe crealion oi adequalely large dlslurbancs-Ir€€ Topics for such deve opment includel

zones is impractical, lhe conslruc(ion ol landforms such as

peninsu as, islands and earth bunds shou d be used lo lhe value oi waledirds and weilandsl

screen noise and visual slimu i the envnonmenlal impacls and eflech of

rec'ealo1 ald possrble soluliors:. vislor lac lies such as car paiks,loilets, paths and iniol - proficiency (esls for shoolng ncludng bird

malon boards shoud be sited caeiully n order lo rctan or idonlification;

croal€ d slurbancejree zones - lmplemoiiation and developmenl oI codes

of conduci:

Temporsl zonation - ecoloqically suslainab e managemenl offish slocksl

. recreationa acl vities should bo 2oned through time io re- manaqemenl of conf icl belween iisheries/

duce their efects and impacts on wate.b rds and other ang erc and piscivorous birdslwild ife, wh ch should b6 coordinated intemalonally when habibl managemenl

P.rticipanl limllalioi. Recrealiona acllvity dur ng the ,atorbird-breed nq season 109

shou d be d scourag€d; . once a I other management lechn ques have be€n ex-

hausted, iechniquos should be used lo reduco the number

. shooting should not begin unlil all luven le wated ds have ol participants pursu ng an aclivity lo a €vol io( erceed-

fedged, Ior oxample Sepiember (no heasiEurcpe)or inq tho ocoogicalcaryinq cepacty ofth6areaOclobor (soulh-west Erope), and shoud close before lhorbreeding success is impacled sLgnilicantly, lor example . time lickets should be encouraged as a means ol liml nq

ih6 €nd oI January for most European species the number ol panic panls at any pa icular time.

. limitalions on lhe number of days each week an aclivity Patrollingcan be practsed should be consderedi

. regulsr patrols oi problem areas shou d be encouraged,

. lemporary suspension oi reoealonalactivities dudng un' especially io implemenl manaoemenl lechniques such as

predictable cilical periods for walerb rds, such as pro' spal al and Iempora zon.ilon codes of conduct, part cilonged severe winler wealher, should b€ eicouragedi panl limilaljon and regu ation of rccrealiona equ pmenti

. nighi lime recrealional acUv lies should be discouraqed . where rosoorcss are lim ling, voluilary patrcll ig should

e.o. shootinq, ban diqoino ea.. be enco'rraged.

R69ulalion/nodiric.lion ol €quipment

.codesofconduclshouldbefuriherdeveoped,withp.r-.reslrclonandmodillcationoitheuseandlypeolequip-licular attoniion io measures thal reduce ihe ellects and ment used n recrealion shou d be reviewed iiequen y, n

impacls oI refieation on walerbnds and other wild Ie; light ol rapid advances in technoioqy. Ln padicu ar:

. codes of conducl shou d be reviewed al Leas( every 5 lead shol in gun ca ridges and angling should

vears and updaled as requ rcd: be banned and eplaced by non-toxc a ternalives:

. adequale imp ementation oi codes of conducl shou d be - mechanica bait digging equipmenl should

encoraged (e.9. through €ducalion and inlerprelalon, and be discouragedi

pairclling), especialLy by r€lovanl governing bodies. - molor boal speeds on rvers and canals

should not exceed 5 mphl

Compensalion - use oi boals wilh lh n, fne bows and

eleclr ca ly powor€d englnes should be en-

. padies rcsponsible lor any envnonmental damage should couraqed.

be made io pay lhe ful cosls ot then acliviiies (ihe 'pol-

lrle'pays'plncrper Cl'ar919 oanier wirh l1p lollow lgshould be considered:

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDAflONS

Appendix 1: Scientific names of speciesmentioned in the text

tlo

BIRD

Bad€gleBar-tailed godwil

Barnacle goose

Beanqoose

Bearded reed ing

Bittem

B lack-headed g u ll

Black'necked grebe

Black-lailed godwit

Black-throated divet

Blackbird

Brenl goose

Canadagoose

Cetl 's warb erChaflinch

Cornrnongull

Cool

Crane

Dipper

Dunlin

Eider

Eygptan goose

Gadwal

Garganey

Goldeneaqle

Goldenplover

Goldeneye

Greal black'backed gull

Greensandpiper

GreyheronGrey ploYer

Grey wagtail

GreylaggooseHeninggull

Scisnlific name

Acro @ ph al u s p a I u d icol a

H a I i aeefu s le u co ceph a I u s

Grusgrus

C he rerlri u s a lca a nd n n u s

BIRD

Kingfisher

Kiltiwake

Knot

Laplandbunting

Lapwinq

Lesser black-backed gu I

Litlle grebe

Lilt e r nged plover

Litue tem

Long-lailedduck

Mallard

MedilerEneangull

Osprey

Pintail

Red-beasled meqanser

Redhead

Reedbunling

Ringed p overRockppil

Sandmarlin

Sanderling

Sandwichtern

Scaup

Sedgewarb erShelduck

Shore ark

ShoYe erSlavonlangrebe

Sn pe

Sci6nlific nams

CWnusolat

Haenatopus asttalequs

Aykya fenna

Aao@phalus scirpaceus

Acroc e ph al u s sch oen o ba e nu s

BIRD

Snowbunting

Spolted crake

Spotled redshank

Teal

Temrninck's siintTufied duck

White-billed diver

INVERTEBRATES

Brine shrmpFen rafrspider

Greal silver diving beelle

Hairy dmgonfy

Kng ragwomLimneticlairysh mp

Peellng ediblecrab

Shore crab

MAMMALS

Mink

FISHES

Barbel

Big-head carp

Big-moulh bulfalo

Bitlerling

Blageon

Bluebream

Brook lloutBrown loulBurbol

Char

ChinesebackcamChub

Commonbream

Dace

Danubianbieak

Eel

Scientific nem6

Cygnus cygnus

Tro g lodyte s lrog lodt'te sM ot ac il I a ll av a ll av i s s i na

Scientifc nam6

Scientilic name

Scientific name

tuophatyngodon pi{Eus

Aababurnus chalcaides

FISHES

Goldlish

GlasscarpGraylngGudgeon

Large-moulh bass

N le perch

Pacilic lmulPaddlefish

Roach

Rudd

Salmon

Schneider

Sea lmulSilvercarpSleelhead

SledetSluEeon

Tolmouh gudgeon

PLANTS

Burrced

Creeping benl

Curledpondweed

Flexlblenaiad

Floating walerplantaii

Rigid hornworl

Sago pondweed

Shap]eaved pondweed

Spiked wateFmi foil

Wigeon grass

Sci€ntilic name

Cle n oph atyn godon id e I la

Sc ard i n i u s ert$ rc pk at n u s

Albumoides bipactatus

H Wo p hth a I n ic h ky s n al itrix

Aondrcstona loxoslona

Sci€nlilic nam6

Pohnogebn pectinatus

Potanog eton conp res s u s

Ce rato ph y Il u n d ener su nPotamogeton pectinatus

P otamog elon acutif a li u s

R o iW a n a sl utli un- aQ u atic,t n

III

Appendix 2: Contacts in the UK

OruanBation Mein addrcss

Assoc ation ol Stllsaler ula

Game Fishery l,lanaOers

Tolophone Web Addres6

Anglers' conserualon Shellord oairy, Shellord, Farm, 01149114770 sww.icclau.comassociaiion Aldemaston, Reading RG7 4NB

Plas P6nrhos, Fford Pendos, 01248 310 444 www.ccw.gov uk

Bangor, LL57 2LQ

Allanlic Salmon Ttusl Mouln, Ptlochry, Pe hshne 01796 473 439 www atlanticsalmonlrusl.org

Bilish ,6socialion id Madod Mil, Rosselt, 01244 573 000 www.basc.org uk

Shooling & Consefraiion Nr Wrexhafi, Clwyd, LL12 oHL

Briiish Canoe Union Adbolton Lane, Wesl &idglod, 0115 982 ll00 *ww.bcu.org.ukNoltinghamshne, NG2 5As.

Brlish Federalion ol Sand I Defrent Park, wheldrake, 01904 448 618 vss.brilishlandsailing.or9.uk112 & Land Yachl clubs York Yo4 6ar

B lish Omilhologisl's Union c/o NaiuBl Hlslory Museun 01442 890 080 wwr.bou.org.ukAkeman SL, T ng, Herls HP23 6AP

Bdtish sub-aqua club Telford Ouay, Soutl' Pier Road, 0151 350 6200 www.bsac.comEllesnem Port, Cheshne cH65 2FL

Brilish Trust for Conseryation 36 St Mary's Slro31, Wallinglord, 01491 839 766 sws.bclv.org.ukvolunreeB Oxfordshire OX10 oEU

B tish Trusi for Omilhology The Nunngry, Thetfod, Norfolk, 01842 750 050 trww.blo org.uk

tP24 2PU

B tish Waier SkiFedemlion 390 Cily Road, London EclV 2QA 020 7833 2855 www.brlishwal6rski.co.uk

Cenlre lor Aquatc Planl Broadmoor Lane, Sonning, 01189 690 072 wwu.aqualic.fieeserve.co.ukManaeemenl Nr Reading, Berks RG4 6TH

Commerclal Coarse Tingilh Fishory, Tidg lh, 01525 714012 www.iisheries.co.uk/ccla

Fisheries Association Bedfodshne M(17 gEw

Countrvside Aqency John Dower House, crescenl Place, a1242 521 3a1 wws.counlryside.gov.ukCh6it6nham. GL50 3RA.

Depadment of Environmenl, Eubpean Wildlile Divsion 0111 312 6236 sww.delra.gov.ukTEnsporl and ths Regions Room 108, Temple Quay House,

(now 0eparh6nl rr 2 The Square, Bislol BS1 6EB.

Depadnenl oi Ag cuhure Dundonald House, Upper Newlonards 02890 424 999 www.dani.gov.uk

and Rulal Development Road, Belfssl BT4 3SB

English Nature Norlhminsler House, Pelerborough, 01733 455 000 www.eng sh-nalure.orc.uk

PE1 1UA

Organiietlon Main sddress Telephono Web Address

Environmeni Agency Rio House, Wale6 do Drive, 01454 624 400 uww.environmenlagency.qov.ukAztec West, Almondsbury,

B slol SS12 4UD.

GameConservancyTrust Fordingbridge,Hampshne,SP6 1EF

01425 652 381 www.gcl.org.uk

Joint NatuE Conseryaiion lionkslone house, Cily Road, 01733 562 626 wsw.jncc.gov.ukCommi(ee PeGrborough PE1 lJY

lnslitule of Fshe es Soe DEFRA

lnland Waledays Amonilies See DEFRA

FBhe es and Food (now See DEFRA

DETRA)

The Old Wh€olurighls, Ham, 01453 811780 yww.iusleco ogy.co.ukBe*eley. G ouesl.rshire GL13 gQJ

2 The Que€nsway, Old Dalby, 01664 822 200 www.cygnel.co.0k/ukfwnasaLei.esieBhne lF14 3OH

Eslaies Depanmenl, 33 Sheep SlEei, 01285 651 818 ww.naiionalkust.org.ukC rencesier, Glos. GL7 1RQ.

tt3

National Trusi lor scolland 28 Charlofle Square, Edinburgh EH2 4ET 0131 243 9300 www.nls.ors.uk

National Fede6iion oi Anglerc Halllday House, Eginlon Junclion, 01283 73,( 735 www.lhe-nfa.org.uk

DedFhirc 0E65 6GU

The River Restoralion Cenlre Silsoe Campus, Silsoe, Eeds MK45 4DT 01525 863 341 sss.qesl.demon.co.uk/fic

Royal Society for lhe The Lodge, Sandy, Beds SG19 2DL 01767 680 551 www.rspb.org.uk

RoyalYachlng Associalion 4 Eaton close, aeeston,

Notinqhamshne NGg 2WB

0115 917 6995 www.rya.org.uk

i Queen Anne's Gate, London SW1H 9BT 0171 3,14 1817 sww.water.or9.uk

Salmon and Troul Association Fishmongere Hall, London Bidge, 020 7283 5838 wy.salmon-lroul.orgLondon EC4R gEL

scotish Nalional Heriiage 12 Hope Terace, Edinburgh EHg 2AS 0131 441 4784 www.snh.org.uk

specialisi AngleB' Seo NationalAssociallon oi Speciaist anglere

Welsh Samon and Trout Swyn Teili, Ponlrhydfend gaid, Yst6d Menig, suw.fishing-in-*ales.com/vslaaAnglifig Association ceredigion sY25 6EF

lhe Wildlowl & Welhnds Trusl srimb dge, Glouceslerchire, GL2 7BT 01453 891 900 wwv.wwl.ors.uk

$rldlile Trusts The Kiln, waleBide, Malher Road, 0870 0367711 uww.wildllfelrusls.orgNewark, NoUnghamshne NG24 1t\,7

114

References

Alri.an Eurtri Watofowl A8rch€nr Inrerim *{ret iar. g)5_ Ttt. Afinon Eulasion t /oklftut AgEMt.aftue nqotirtion n|ting (lune 1995) ond Agren.nt te tuith A.tjo ptan_ A1licanL*u";un Wot",ro*rInterim S€ret iar, The Ha8te

Ahlen, I. 1966. Studis @ the disrribution atul eology oI rhe lftite gele podi.cps alols in Swe.lm. V,r Inseldrid 4; 1-!5Ailmd, M, & coharl. F. 1989. clll pedation on Eider ducuings So,mrar.a n.tiissi,d: effeds of hrhan disruban@

Biol%ical AJns.motia 4a: 775-27Alerstffi, 1 1990. Bnd miglarion. C.mbridge Univ.rsity &ess, C.mbri.lSeAllarr,J.R., Kirby,IS. & Iore, CJ. 1995 rh€ bioloSy of CdBda ge..e Erc ta ntuhnsG in i.latim to rhe m.nago€nr Df

feral popll.tids. Wildlif. Biolor!r' 7: 129113.AllIDrt, c., O'Bric., M. & Ca<lbur',,, C.I. 1986. S mey o/ R.dsh"nk ond ott, breetling birds afl sdttnorches in Btitoi lgBS.

Nature CoNenancy Council, CSD Reporr No. 649Ande.son, I.M. 1950. Some .quatic ctmgEs fdtowing fish rcmoyal lour at ofwittltife Mo n*tultt .14:

2t)6:2ty)Andeson, D.R. & Brnlur" Kl t926. pop krion ecotoe! oJ ttu nolant r t nE 4lLn i etproiino, ,,

", -i,ot. us tor, uWildl Serr. Resource Publicarion. 128, Washington DC

Anderson, D.W. & Keith, J.O. 1980 The h.* influeme on $abird msting swes: corenarid impticarions. Eiolo8i.,lCo"sda,tio, 18: 65,80

Andereon, P., Edwards, P.I. & TaiiersfieH, p. 1987. Runn! ed. retail d@elop e t at the ARC gnoel pits, Hlth. F,ftt,,1iaysbary. UnpublGh.d.eporr

Andereson, A. 192. Adlir&t n I Harsjor. R€porr, Skogshogskolan, UppsalaAndersn, C., Dsg6ren, H., CronLEr& c. & c€1in, C 1978. Etre.rs of pla,rkfumE m.t henthivorous Iish on org isms

md watei .hcmistry in tubophi. laks. Hydrorioiotid 591: 9-15.Andrews, I. & Kinsnurr, D. 1990. crmel Pit Restamtio Far rr'r.liire. RSpB, Sandv, UKAno. loo7. WrlJr.wls 90 l,rd 6pe on NNr. -1"tt4,.)t t2Appleton, T.P. 1982 Rutl d Wate. NarG Re*we: cDn epi, design and mnagemmr. H{dobiotoria B8r 2U 24.AppletoD T.P. 1993. The MimSEmst of Rurl d Wats for wildlif€. Inr pruee.n

8s o/, Sy,,po,i"," o" rl," S,t1""t o1Witary"d Man ndne Weiandi ARC Wildfowl Cenrre, Creat linJordAppletorr T. 191%. Rarlrnl Wztet - n tue studt, tnt.8rdtinS cmwonon antt recftantm. Unptbtished mmus.npr, Leicests-

shirc Wildlife Trust.Ar.tander, P., Fjelds4l & IeNen, . 1984. sellads med lunpudebade jagt og mdre forsb,.elser aJ tusl€ og saelo ve.i

Saltholm maj seprerbe. 19&. Miljoministerier, Frednin8ssryretser! D.nmkArkino Willes, c.L. 1969. Wildfowl dd r€.re.tion: a balan . of Buiremmls. anrsll Wn ter Sryply 7t: S-75.Ba.citi, N. & Cherubini, c. (eds ) 1997. Muropem conlercn e on cormo. rs. Sqryttren at Xiri,a" ai AioUgi, Uto

Selaaggina ,JVI: 7-594Baillie, S M., Cldk, N.,\. & Ogilvic, M.A. 1986. Cdd ?dathet norenents ol ataterJout antl onde1: aa o olysis ol nngi,g

,e@e,',s. Natue ConseNa.y Council CSD Repdt No. 650, p.tqborough.Bajkov, A D. & Shortt, A. H- 7939. Northem pik la&fth os pr.datore oh Wit*ftut aflL, M,sk/,rs. Dlcks Unlimfted.

Balddsare, G,A. & !ole[ E.C- 7994- Wahfiun Edog! aat ^{anaAd]et.

Jotm Witey & Som In.., New york.Balser, D.S., Dill, H.H. & N.lso& H.K. 1968. Effsr of predartr rcductim m wareriowl neiing succes. Io,rml d Wildlrls

Manag.heflt 32: 669-6a2BanrErr, M., Adams, C. E. & 'fippett,R. 9)6.'lhe efre.h of pauetuuts on he aqutie e@inn Dn tt Lo..h Innond. Gtdsgaw

Univ6ity Eield Statior! Rowa.dema Amlal Report 199415Bardsley, L., Cmhs, A & ciles, N. 2001. T,re ,t rtdrd Restotuti.h M"nuaL. Th€ Wildlifc Trusts, N.wark, LK.Barrelt, C.A. 1987. Effccts oI dcr"rbdce md hunting on rhe lehaviour of Cana{la goose family groups in Wisconsin.

Iodnal ot,^\hldLb ManqmL at <' \t7 <22

Baft, B.D.l. (ed) 1997. Arr. d.osysten in pnit: tcpon al E Arcti. gnat h"bitnt mrkinS gtutp. Ar.ric Coose Ioinr vstureSpeial PlblnaiioL US Fish ad Wildlife Seri.., WashinSron DC, ad Cmdi Witdlile Serice, Otrdwd

Batt, B.D.l., Afton, A.D., Andereon, M C., A ney, C.D., lormson, D.H., Kadlec, I.A., & Krapu, C.L 1992. E oto&.! aiiMa atdttflt tt Brcettug Wott{@r. MinnMta press, UsA

Baiten, L.A, 1977. Sanin8 on reserois and fts eItu ts on waterbirds. Bioio8rit C,E.ro,tio, 11: 49-57BarleIL L.A., Bibby, C.1., Clemor, P., Ellio! C.D. & poder, R.L 1990. Red Dord B,.rs ,, A/ir,ir. poyser, IondonBel Ser, L. & Bedard, I. 1989. Responses of sraginS Creatq Snow ceese tu humn di6rn$nce. Iounal of Wntlile

Ma agdnent 53: 773-779BelmSer, L. & Bedard, I. 1990. Energeric cost of m -indu.ed disrurbmc€ ro sraAing Snow Ceese. io,m,l

Miiogcnent 51: 36 473ell, D.V., Olin, N., Austin, L., Hayhow, S., rones, A., Srro.& A. & Tores, E. 1984. I/k Inpnct af Arytjs anwitittle ontl

Site A,fliry. Department oI Applied Biology UWIST, CardifiBell, D.V. & Ausiin, L. 1985. Tne g.* fishinS sea$n md irs .ff&ls on ovd winrering wit.llowt. Br,osiel a.o*croadn, 33:

65 80

B.n, DV, & Owe[ M. 1990. Shooting Disturbannc+ a Review. Pp159 171 in Matrews , C V _'t. Ga) Matugi g Wdktfulfofxldtro,s. IWR! Spe.ial lilbllcation No 12 , lwliB, Slimbridge.

Aell, D.v. & !ox, A.D. 1991. Shooting Distufia e- Afl A*Bsnunt oJ Xs Inpoet nhd Elle.ts ofl Out tli kn g Wat rloujPopuldtinn. a nEir Distnb nofl in the United Kin&non Reporr by The Wildfowl & Werlands 1.tust and the BrtishAso.iation for ShoDting d Consdvation

Bengtson, S. A. 19na. Variarions in clur.h sie in ducls in relatioh to the food suppty. Ir,s 113: 523-526.BenSrson, S. A. 19nb. Iood dd feding oI divina du.ks brccding at L.rke Mlvarn, Iceted. Omis Fenniu 48: n 92Bi.knrore, C. r. & Lddd, P. I. 1989. tteconstrucrin8 fEhwater hrbtlts in developmnr {hd€s. Ir Bu.kl.y, C.p. (Ed.).

Biologiul Hdbitat Recansttu.t ofl. Belhavm, LondonBnkhead, M. & PoiB, C. 1985. flr Mrt? Szdn. Chisropher HelmBla.k, I.M. 1998. Cot*mtio d Mfugmdt Phn ftr the Sulbotd pop latim al the Borndc c4c. Unpubl Rep. bI The

Wildfowl & Wetlmds Trut toDirectorate ol Nature Nlangemnr, Notray .nd S.onish Narural HditaseBrad, CJ. 1987. Duck plagu€. Ir lriend, M. (ed.) a,eld cuiAe b Wldljle Dtea.es: cewnt FieU pracen pr nti Dis6es of

Mts/abry Airds. U.5. Iish & Wildlile Seri.. [email protected] Pullicarion 162 USIws, Wdhin8ron, D.C.Brad" C.I. & Do.herty, D.E. 1988. Posr+pizoon. lurveys oI waterfowl lor du.k llague (du.k virus otentis). A",an

Diseoses 32:722 73t)

Bregnballe, T-, Gosec$tard, J.D. & Durell, S.E.A.l.v.d. 1997 Ma.agemmt of cormorant nlmbes on Eurcpe a *condstep tow ds a European .onscrvation md manaSem.nr FIan. In: vm Dam, C. & Asbnr, S. (eds.). C.Dda,rs n,l,rna, ,,r.rests. IKC mruu beher, WageninAen, Nerherlands. Pp 62122

Brighkh Univosity 2002. Woter b6etl spott nnd reo.otkflr &c /tuts. Brightd Univmty S.hool oI Envnoment Brighton.Bdnkhuar, R O. & Walsb B. 1%Z Rcrhme Me.e, EnElmil, a tu.rh.r insrance of EttrotN?hy. /. a,sr. R6. ad. C,,. 24:

1299-1309Brodsky, L.M. & Weatherhead, P.I. 1984. Behavioural md ecologi.al fa.rors .ontriburinS to Ahe.ic Bla.k Du.k-

Manard hybridizatior Io rnol ofwillliJe Manrgenefi 4a: 846-852Brydl D.M. 1978. Moulting Shelducts on ihe Iorth estuary. Aird Srldr 25: 103:IO8Brym! D.M 1981. Moulting Shelducls on the W6h. , ird Srdrt 2a: 15A5A I 15B'fC\l.7991. wntetudls ond W?thiAs. A Ptdcticrl Canremrtio, Hnfldb,ot. BTCV, R.adingBuict, A.M., & I'aton, D.C. 1989. lmpa.t of olf road vehicles on the nesting sn.cess oI Hooded plov.rs Crnralr,ls

ruDn.oilis in thc Coorcng Region of South Austmlia Ent 89: 159 772Bu8er,I 1986. T}e effecr oa hlman activity on shorcbirds ln t{o .o6tal bays in norrh eastem Uniied Shres. Er?r.rr.,

tnl Consetuotin 73: 123-730

Eug€r, t. & GocMeld, M. 1983. B.haviouEl resporc ro hman intods of Hening cutls md crear Bla.k-b.cked Cultswith varying exposm ro humn distubm.e. B.I@,.,ral P/d.esss 8: 327 344

Butterfield, I., Coulson, J.C., Kearsey, S.U., Momghan, P., M.Coy, I.H. & Slain, c E 1983. The Herrin8 cull L,rrs4/3enr,tus as a .drier of Salmonenr. I- HlgiznE Anb.97: 429436

Callaghan, D. 1996. Update on $e ruCN/SSC Amtida€ Action Plan. Thtatded Wntaftnot Specjatkt croup Nrus 9: 5-6Callaghan, D.A. & Greerr A.J. 1993. Wildfowl ai rGt, 1993- Wldliul 44:149 169Carraghan, D.A., Knby, I.s. & Hughcs, ts. 1995. Txe ert.rs o/ td.otiohrt turterl i hmri"g an biotlirdsiry: ,nptjuti. s fot

slstaiful,liry. Report to The World Wide lmd for Natue (Inremarional), l he WildJowl & Wettands Trut, SlimbridS€Callaghaa D.A., Knby,I.S. & Hughs, B. 1997' Ilrc efl€cts of reoearioml waterfowl hmiing on biodive.sity: implicariom

Ior sustditubiliq,. Pp. 507-574. In: Irese, C.H. (Ed.). lr,meshng Wd Sp.cis: tfltpliakons t'at Biodiwsjty Cat*nrtkn.Iohns llopkim Press, Baltimore dd London

Campbell, l- H. & Mudge, G P 1989. CoRiation of Bla.k throaled Divers in S.otl d. RSPB ConseN.rion Review 3:72-74.

Campicdon, Ir. :1979. Quelqus domes .on.ert nt l'hivmage d6limico16 su le &1sin d'Ara.hon (Circndc). a'Or'w,49r ll3-131

Carlone, C. 1915. Guidcline$ fo. estimtin8 leedin8 performance ol diving bnds. I,Midrul 46:1t912ACdon, I.A. Ir. & Robinm, W.L. 1994. Respomes of breeding Conmon Irtu io hman a.tivity in Upper Michigan. In:

Keetes, I.l. (Ed.). Aquati. birds in the bophic web of l^ks. Hy.lrobiLagio 279/2aO: 431 43aCds, D.N. & M qui$, M. 1996. Tho Jietliry bd@idt md i"qad of gft! htonN an fsheil\: a litttotuft tu;aa. r,E, RdrtLoryCEED.1943. Wdtet skiing and the Enoituntutt: A literaturc mitu, Uk Centt 1r E anoni and Cenn! Jar IAsn Rewtn

1986. A..tsF ta the ctuntryside lat ftct@nan a n spart. Comtryside Commi$ion md Sporrs Cou.il, l,ndonCEFAS/EI mdated. Controls on the kelinia d reletre ol non-narive Iish in Englmd and Wdtes. Irfomrion ieailer.

Tb. C.nter for Envnomr, tuheries & Aquacultm S.ien e/Environm.nt Asmq,Childms, D & Roth€, T. 1990. I,lamgEmcnt of Paci6. flrvay gce: m eaerci* in compte{fty .nd ftusharion. Tm. N.

A. Wildl & Noi Re!. ConJ.55:327-332Colcmr! A.E. Co1em , I.T., Coleman, P.A. & Minton, C.D.T. 2001. A 39 y..r study ol a Mute Swrn Cy8, r r/or

populdtion in the Engtish Midl ds. ,ld.d 89: 123133.Colcman, J.T., Spray, C.1., Ptrival, S.M., Ri.keard, A.T., & Y6Dran, P. 2002. Tne dynmics oI a flo.k of Mrtc Swans at

Bemi.k lpon Twed wilh particul iefcrence to the effe.ts oI a8e, sex, so.ial sr.tus md body cond ion on moultWatufiitds 25 Speciol Puhlicn on 1: 346-351.

Col6, B 1995. Wetlmd Mmagement.,4 S"nsvr, E,glFl H.nt 3.. WARP Oc.asional l,aper 9, Univsfty oI ErererCodh, E.G., Lail, D.0., RockweI, R.L & Cooke, F. 1991. l,ong term dtrline in body siz! in a Snow c@se popularion:

Niden e of svi.onmmtal degndation? Jour.al of Anim.l Ecoloinr 60:483-496Coole, A.S. r9Z The bntls t Crafim WntcL I1 ,ti,8a,r HuntinAdon Local Puui.atuns C:roup

frEFERENCES

c-ote A s 19an ohfrzrion nn lrow .lose .eltain passerine sp€cies will tolerate m aplroa.hin8 hrm.n in ual mdsuburban areas. 6Dlo8i.d Consefftio" 18r 85-88

Cooke, A.S. 1985. Ef.rs ol watet Skiing upat Waterfaan. Unpub. sutmission ro rhe Bedfordshne md Hunringdo.shir.Natuialists Trust

Cooke, A.S. 1987. Disrurb.nce by mglos ol bnds ar cralham Water. pp. 15-22. In: M.ittan.l & Tumer (eds.) 1987.AryLing ann wtildlife in Fftsh W,&4 ITE SymIDSim No. 9, ITE, Merlewood

Cowx, LG. & Welcomme, R.L 1998. Rehrbilit.tion al Riren Jor Fish. A ntd! Mdttokt by th. Eltop.an tnLand Ei-shtriesAbi r! Ca mission oI F/lO. Fishing News Dooks

C.answicl, P.A. 1995. ,4 a,r. Suat"tet S tuel! aJ Wildlrul i, Crear Bndfl, 199J. Report to lne Ioft Narure C.nqc^r1ionComittee, The Wil.Uowl & Wctlands Trust, Slimbridge

Crmwi.lt P.A., Wate6, R.I., Eva[' I., & Pollitt M.S. 1996. The lNetlond Bird SLtaL-! 199+95: Wildfual dwndet Cnunts.ETo/ WwT/ !.sPB/INcc, slimhidge

Crmswiclr, P.A., Waters, RJ., Musgrove, AJ. & Pollitt M.5.1997-'Ihe Weiantl Bitd Slfla! 7995 96: Wiltlfuto| ond Witlrco,rrs BTo/WWI/RSPB/INCC, SlimbridSe

Cmnswick, P? Pollitt, M., Mus8rove, A. & HuShes, R. 1999. 'l'hc Wetlmd Bnd Suwey 1997 98: Wildfowl m.l Wadercounrs. B'r o/ wwr/ RspB/INcc, slimbridSe

Cromie R.L., Brow[ MJ., Hugh6, n. & Wi]lim, c.M. 2@z Prmlen@ al kon shot pelLts in Ma ln putu\as.d lnn ganedzalen i England ifl uiaitlr 20012002. Unpubl. Rep to the RSPB. !VWI, Slimbndge.

c."yer, M. & ldw ds, R W. lnYa. The impact of mgler glomdbat on bdthic lNertebnres and sediment rspirarion ina shallow atrophn resewoi. Enbinnnentnl Pollution 46:737-750

Gye., M. & ldw ds, R. W., 194%. lngling litter. Ir Maitlmd, P. S. & Trhd, A. (eds.) . Aniliry ond uildlile ifl fiesttuat *.NERC 1987

Cryq, M., Linley, N.W., Ward, R.M.,Stratford, J O. & ,^ndeMn, P.F. 1987. Disrlrban.e of ovwlntering wildJowl bydgl€s at two reserons in Sourh Wales. 6ird S,dy 34: 191199.

II6 D.hl, T.E. r90. Wrlinl ktrs.s in it Uni ted Stda.s, :1780s to 19a0s. U.S. Iish ad Wildlife Scrvi.e rc?or! Wdhingrm D.C.Dahlgren, R.B. & Korschgen, C.1,. 7992. H nnn distutbanres aJ udterhrul: An anflator.d DiDlio8r"rfty. Resom€ puui.a-

6m184. USDI Fish &Wildlife Seri.e, W6hingron D.C.Dmell, K. & SjotEr& K. 1982. S€asnal d diet chmSs in rhe Ieding behaviou of some dabbltng du.k T{ies on a

breeding lake in northcm Sweda. Onis S@nnitutica 73: 729-1MDaftingron Amenfty Resemh Trost. 1973. Ri.Jrmfltum& c/,"ci Als. Spdts Colmn No.4. The Sporis C@ncil, Lond@Davidson, N.C., laffoley, D. d'A., Doody,I.P., Way, L.S., cordoll J., Ke, R., Drake, C.M-, Pienkowski, M.W., Mitchell,

R. & Duff, K.L. 1991. N,t,/. coneruonon ond estwies in ctaa Bnf,ir. NatE CoIMwm.y Cdn il, PerdboDughDavidsn, N.C. & Piersm., I. :1992. The migration of knots: coseration n@ds md implicatore-WnAd StuA! Cnttl B LI.

64, Suppl.: 198-209

Davidsn, N. & Rothw€ll, P. t9!!. Disturtmce to watsfowl on estuaries. Wader Study Cro p B,il.ri, 68. Spccial lssleDavidson, N.C., Roihwell, P.l. & Pienkowski, M.W. 1995. Towdds a flyway conservation srrareSl for wadeB. wdd./

Study Croup Bullenn n: 70-arDavid-{o N.C. & Stroud, D.A. 1996. Cmswhg intehati@al .Gstal habitat networks on migatory waredowl It}vays.

Iounal al cdstol consnatinn 2: 47-uDavis, T-1. (ed.). 1994- Ire Ron r Can"dtion Mm al: A Gaide to ttu Conenna ofl l,te aflt$ of lntelnntutBt t partane

eqlecinllv os Wdt dul Hobitar. Ralrer Convention Bureau, Gland, SwitzerladDchny, S, 6$.ott, D.A. (eds) 2002. Woktund Population [,sn ntus lhi\l EdinoL Wetiands lntmational Clobal Ssies no

12. Wag€ningo, IlE Netherl dsDelany, S N., Creenw@d, J.J.D., & Knby, I.S. 1992. Nd,iondl MLte Sunn suruey 1990- R€porr ro WWI/BTO. 26ppDepartmot of Envismmt 1991. Sport ann Rectution- Plemin8 Policy cuid rce Note 17. HI4-SO, t ndon.Dcparhnet of tinvirment, Food md Rual AfiaiE 2003. A biodia$iry nntq! 1t Englond- Mrdunry protftss: baseline

,ss.ssffi r. DEFRA- Bnst{n

Departmenr of Envnoment, Tnhspolt and the F€gions 1999. Qtolity af Llfe C.unts: Indnabrs ht o strakg! Iot sushljn7lLAnelopnent kt tu? United Kiflgdo, HMSO l-mdon

Dep tm€nt oI Envnomenr, Transport and the Regiotu 20At)- Watmaqs fot tonatru DET& London.D6gmg€s,I L. & Ro.hique I. 1986. lnfllcncc ol acidity md .ompetirion wit} the fish @ the dwelopmmt of du.k1in8s

in Quebec. Watur Ail afld Sdjl Pollutkfl 30: 743 750Dodrnan, T., de Vaa& C., Huberr, E. & Nivet, C. 1997. ?41.," Wr*rrrirol G,s,s 1992 Wctlmds tntmtimal, Wa6enin6en,

'lhe Nethqland$Drebbot, H F. & Kantrud, H.A. 1q/4. Upl d du.k ncsring rclated to land e and prdnro rcdn tn\. Ioumol alw it'e

Maflagdneftt Xa: 257 265.

Duebbert, H.L & Lolemom, I.T. 1980. High du.k nestinS su.es in a pedaior redu.ed environmmt h mdl afwldliftMn ag.ncnt 44. 42a 437

Dznbin,,\.\W.Apnniall.!onnototetlbibliographyafdistutuon,noieandharasnentelJ..iso,,ids.CanadianWildlifcServi.e Sask.to.n. 337pp.

Eadi., J. M & K.ast A. 1982. Do coldmeye d Per.h compete for nEd2 Oe.diojid 55: 225,230.Ebbin8., B.S. 1991. 'I}e impact of hmting on mortality mt€s md spati.l distrlbution of seese wint€rins in the Wesrem

Pal.ar.ti.. Ard., 79: 197 204

EC COM. 1995. Wis. ,se,,d ..n*tuonon of a'Ltlnnis. Commmicarion froh the Commission to rlrc Comcil and rheEuropean Parliament. Com(95) 189 final. Comission of the Euopean Coamunities, Brussels

REFERENCES

Eddington, J M. & Eddington, M.A. 1986. Eold8y, Rer.ario, d d Tdf,lz. Cambridge Unive6ity Pres, Ne York. r9u!!Edwards, R.W 1 990. The impact of angLing on .onseration ad water quality. Pro.eedi"Bs o/ /lE I"s tit,n of lishctits

Managddt 2lsr AnniL.Bary Conf*ene- pp 47-50Elsol M.I., Heaney, L], Reynolds, C. & Sidaway, R. 1995. Coad pncn.e in uE pl ni g and mnnngen.nt al spart nnd o.ttue

redeanon in nle eolnlrysid.. A r.?ort lor the Comtryside Comision md tlE Sports CouncilEnvnomnr Ag€..y. 1996. Buvet Bmte: yaur CLitL ta Sto.ti,g aisft EA, DristolEnSrish Narure/BAsc. 1995. Glid.tinB ht the rtunnrn al tlqts lot @"tefi,@I. v?rsian 2. English Narurc, Peterbor@ghEnSlish Natm 2m0. Posina Statffient: Coufltrysil R.r.aro,. EN, PetdboouAh.Eriksson" M.O.G. 1978. Lake *leiion by Goldoeye du.klinSs in relation to the aburd ce oI Iood. I4i/dral 29:8135ErikssoL M.O.G. 1979. Competition befirccn heshwatcr fish and Gold..cye Br.ep,t la .1,,1+1, t. for common prq,.

Oecalagin 47: 99-70?

Erikssn, M.O.G. 1%3- The role oI lish in the sle.tion of lakes by non-pG.ivorous ducks: Mall d, Teal md coldoeye.

Eriksso( M.O.G. 1984. Acidifiation of lal6. nurD 3: 260-262

Evm. tLA. 1!,B9. R€spome of limti. irR.t populatiom ol two a.idi. ns ss lals to liming md hook hout (SiLelnrshntinotir). cantulion loutul tl Fish.ries ond Aquati. scirnr.s 46: 3a-3s1

Evm, P.R., Gosscustdd, J.D. & Hale, W.G. (Eds.). 1984. Cnstal Wrdos nnd Wildltul i, Wi,td. Cambridgc Univcrsity

Fabri.ius, E., Bylin, 4., F.mo, A. & Radeeater, T. 1974. Inha and interspecific teritorialism ln mixed .olonics of th.Czmda co.s. Bnnta cafladdsis md th. Creylag Goose A set afl*. Omis Sondiv"ica 3: 2535

Femell, H., Iames, D.B. & Morris, I. 1974. Pouution of a sroraSr resenoii by roosting gul]s. Water Treatment andtrxamimiion 23: 5-20

Finlalsi, C.M., HoIiE G.E. & DavG, TJ. (eds.) 1992. Ilam8inS Meditenme Wetldds md Then Bnds. l]4RB Spri,lP,Dli.aLo, 20, Slimlridge, UK. 285 pp.

Firnq6orL M. & Moser, M. 1997. We nnds. Facts On Fil., Onord & New Yo*Forles, LI. 1986. The qu tiiy ol lead shot, nylo. fishin8 line and orher lftter .liscar.t€d at a codse fi.hing lale. 8io/di.rl 117

Consematiat 3a: 2L-34!omE! B. 196a. Reoeatio, i, the counhysile, ntrynck and opportun,r.s. So.iety for the ftote.tion.,f N.tlrc Rs6e FLadhNk.lowlq,5.L- 1992- Surue! aJ boit .olie.tion ," Er,,in. Joint Natre Commation Conmit{€. Rcport No. 107.

Iox, A.D., Jones, A., Singleto+ R. & Agnew, A.D.Q. 1994. I@d supply md ihe dlers of re.r.ational disturban.e .n theabm.lan e dd distribution of winte.ing Po.h d on a gavel pit compl* in southem Btnai^. Hyt obiologia 279/28A:

253 261Iox, A.D. & Madso,l. 1997. Behaviou.al dd distributi@al effects of hlnting distu$ .e: implicarions for refuSe

desi,sh. It'unal of AppLi.l E.otng! 3a,1 \3Fhzie\ 5.19E6. An @etui@ af th. uonn\ Pantur sit s. Wetlands Intsational Publi.ation No. 39.

fude.i.k R.B., Cl,rk, W.H. & Kas, E.E. 1987. lehaviour, enqgeti.s & managsent of retusins wat€dowl a simulationnodel. witdtife Mo ograth 96:35

F.ikke, i. & La!.*n, K 1994. Forla.dsiagt I Vadehavet. Med en analyse af betydningm for mdefugle. D mdtsMirioundsogcrscr. &81i8 R ppott f1o DMu, No to2

Fumcas, R.W. 1973. Roost site sletion by wdcrs. Sdtnsh Bitds ?: 247-247

Cam. Corcenan y.1981. Wildfrul Mntug ent on ifllanA u,I?/s. pp108, Gee Cocer...y Ttust, F.rdingbridge.Game Consenan y Trusr. 1995. The Lpact aJ HLntiry Distttuone d ttu Dyna ics ofwatatbitd P.'f lations: A Roitu.

^Critigue by the BioNhi.s Department ol ihe Gam C.Irwac, Trut. Report to IACE. 'l'lE Gam. Cm.m.nry 'rrust,

Gddason, A. & Eilrmsoll, A. 1994. R€spore of breeding duck popdarids n] cha8€s in food supplY.rn: Kereks, IJ.\Fn.). Aquatic Btds tu the Trophn Web al Lkes DmlopnEnts in HydlobaloS! 96. Kluwa A.ademi. PuUisheB, Dor&{hiP! 15-28

Gawn, P. 1983. Lddsape planni.g fo. wildiile in.onjunction with recreatio.al a.tivity md other lmd uss in gav€lqtnis. bt TE ptu@ditgs ol a s!ryoriln an E subje.t .J witdlife .n Man-Made w. o di. ARc WndJowl c€nrre, GreatLinfold, Milton Keynes pI164-175

Cerd6, ( & Recptuyd, H. 1983. Zff raumli.hen VdtcilmS ubdwintdnder Saatund Blessgmre (4"trrla1,,/,s md,A,trralbiroro) in Abhangigkeit vDn naturschtrtdhadLi.hen md lordernden EhJ1ussen. lra yog.la,.lt 104: 141-153

Gerh.rd, M- 1994. Urcachen md kuzlrisrig€ Auswirkungen von SroruSm auf den Wa$svogelbestmd des Bi€bersteinerWeihers. Crz,adnzs 30: 70-76

GibboG, D.W., Reid, I.B., & ChapDEn, R.A 1993. Ttu N@ A ns aJ Breeding Bitds in Bntuifl nfld ttla d: 1988 7997 B'tO/SOC/IWC. T. & A.D. Poysa, London

Crlbcri, G., Gibl'oro, D.W. & liw,1.7998. Bitd MonitarinS MeAEds. A Manwl of Te.nniqks lot Kc.,t UK Spiies. PSPB,

Gils, N. in press. Es.r,,8 rlatitnships betued anterlaul md ,sr. IWRB Spe.iat Pulli.ation. IWRB, Slimbridge, tlKGiles, N. 1990. Effecrs of inoeasing 1 a1 chnonomid dmsities on the lnderwater feding su.c€ss oI downy TuJted

ducklin8s Alhya fuliEila. t$|tLfot.l 47: 99-706

Gnes, N. 7992. WiLllfe AJlet G/nrel. Game Coreev .y Ltd, Hampshiie pp140

Gnes, N. 1993. TuJted ducl , ythyd rli8lin halitat use and b.ood suiviv.l increae$ aJter fish remoal from gavel pithkes. rn: Kereres, I.I. @d.). aqrotn Btub in th! Tr.Vhn wel of Litls D@etotm t-. in Hytlrorrloty 96. Kuwer Academi.Publishs, Dodrecht

Giles, N. 1998. Ir6k ,r"r Iishena A Wildlil. Can*tuotiot- A c@d Pntie Caid.. Fnenament Agency. 3lj pp.Gil€s, N., Saeei M. & Wright, l.M. :1990. Diet .omposition ard prey pretu.eme of Temh TitrLr fi"a L., Comhon Bream

Abrdtnis brn,N L., Perch PnLa l,,idnlis l- ,nd Rdch R,tiirs rurl s L. in two conhbting gavel pil lakes. io,n,t o/ ais.tBiolqy 37: 945 957

Cile$, N. & Summe.e D. W. 7996. IlclpinS J:Eh nl tubldnd ti!a/s. came Consetr,n.y Ttus! FordnEbridge, EnSlmd. pp 40Cill, I.A., Slthdlan4 W.I. & Norir K. :1998. Th. .ons.tym.cs of lrrllrr dieru.bano tur estu ine bi.ds. RSpB Cds.r

,ation RNtu 12: 67 72

Cill, J.,^., Sutherld4 W.l. & WarkilMlL A.R. 1996. A merhod to quantily the effects of human disturban.e @ anin.lpoptlations. lofinol ol Applied Ecology 33:7A6-792

Gill$pic, C,D, 1985. Hybndtation, inbogresion ard mrphomeiri. differentiation beiwem N,Iallard ,4Ms p/,fu/ru..'rdsand Grey Du.! Ia,s t,pcr.il,osi in OtaAo, New Zeal d. Auk 702: 459 t49.

Cnpin, 4.1qfi. L oirfin tal im$ct nls,tun| cuttiry edge Jt tle 21" Cottury. Cahbridge Urivcity I1es, Cattrid8e, t)(Gim, ri.B. & Melvill., D s. 1983. Mdrlr i, lirds. lTo Guide 19. Brilish Trusr for omftholog/, TringGirout, I.F. 1981. Du.ks ncsting in associdtion with Cmdd ceese. Iatnal of WiLllift Maflageneflt 45: 77A 7A2Gnoux, I.-L & Paite6o., LJ. 1995. Ddily ftovcnhts dd tEbitat use by radiGraS8ed PinkJooted Cee Are/ 0/adryrryr.rrs

winrering in nDrth-east S.otl.nd. WiLdlttul 46: 31 MComs, R. 198i. ?tu .rfc.r o/ uill{otuliry on lhe 1\ataftul dt Gayton Sn s, 7980 7981. Unpublishcd r.por! RSPB, SandyCore' R. 7 2. I1E elfe.t of uildfutulins on Ih. udtotf al dt Cayton Snnds, 7987 7982- IJnprbllsh.d r.p.rt, RSPB, SandyCoode, D.A. l9li1. kdd pisni,a i, S?o,fls. Report of the Narure Consdmcy C.mil s Working (]ioup Nature Consd

an.y ColncilGormsson, G. & Karl*oo J. 1976. Stomingsfiekter pa dju - med erempel frm gasja1<ren I Sknne. ,4/sr 15i 119 124Goss-Cusiard, J.D. 1985. Foraging behaviour of wadinS birds and the carrying capa.ity oI esrudies. pp 169-188. lnl

Sib1y, R.M. & Smithy, R.H. (eds-) Bdutiouml Ecolog.tt: E.oloSnol Cofleqrener ol Adopti,e Ber""Dxr. OxJord. lta.lwellS.iPnrif i. Pnhli.,ri.nq

I ,l g Gcecushrd, J.D. 1993, 'l'he efIe.t of higation md s.ale on the stuqr of bird popllarims. 1991 Wittu.by larue. BirdStuny 40: aL96

Gos-Custard, I.D. & Verloven, N. 1993. Disturban.c and fccdjng shoiebirds on rhe Er. Btuary wa.l! Stutly CroupBulletin 6A: 59 66

Coss C6tard, J.D., Caldow, RW.G, Odke, R.T., lf, V Dit Durell, S.E.A., U i, J. & Wesr, A.D. 1995a. Cmscquenccs oIhabitat lc md .hdge to popdariom of winrerinS migraiory bi'ds: F€di.ting ilE l@ar d Slolal eftu.k fse studiesof indllidlal6. Ioa :137: 56-66.

Coss Clusta , J.D., Cl ke, R.T., Bri88s, K.B., Ens, BJ., Exo, K-M., Smil C., Beinrem, A.1., Caldow, R w c , C.tt, D C.,Clarlt N., lr V Dit DmlL S.E.A, H rG, M.P., Hul{her, J.8., Mdhinga, P.L., Picozi, N., Prys,lone, R., Safricl, U. &West, A.D. 1995b. Population .onsequences oI winter habitat bss in a miSratory shorebird. L Esiimating mod.l],ftneters. loutnal ol Applietl E olagy 32: 320-336

Golgh, R E. 1984. Laborabry conJim€d outbreals of duct virus ententis ldu.l plague) in rhe United KinSdom from'tr77 ro 1942. Vetunhnry Recanl M{.h 17: 262 265.

Gougb R.E. & Aldmder, D.J. 1990. Duct vins mtEitis in creat Brnain, 1980 tu 1989- Vektimry Reanl lw 76: 595-597Greenwood, R.I. 1986. Inflr.nce of Sbiped Skunt rcmoval on upland du.k nesting succes in North Dakota. Wildife

Societq Bulletin 74: G17

Gre8ory, R.D., Eaton, M.A., Noble, D.G., Robinsn,I.A., PaMns, M., Baker H., Arsnr! c. & Hilton, C.M. 2003. Ir" strtaJ ke uK's Bnds 2002. PSPB, B1I), lvWT & JNCC, Sandy.

Grei8, I.C. 1980. Du.k hybridization: ! threat b speics jntegrity. Artu d.t,.,'e 32: 8aA9c/ie, P. 7944. IlE eJled of *iliflS afl tu T fcd DL& of $. Mid-Col,. ydlley SSSI M5. thsG, UniveFiry Couege, LondonGrice, P. 1993. ReGalional disturbm.e on inlmd wate6: assessing and reducinA the effe.ts on waterbnds. Lrformtion

note Ircm Spedss C,flwarioz Emrlook. English Natue PeterborolghGromdzli, M. & Gromdzla I. (eds.) 1997. Coimor ts in Europe. P.lnn /ourrl o/ E.olo3? xlv 1 334

Haddoi, M. 19t4. re malysis of hybridization betwem Malldds md Grey Du.lG i. New Z.aldnd, Arl 101:l90r9lHagoeijer, wl.M. & Blair, M- \eds-).1997 The EBCC At\ds ol Eunpean Brcednt| Bituls. Thcn distnbutu a d nbutu1,n.e.'l

& AD Poy$r, Londo.Haland, A. 1983. Home ran8. rse and spa.i.g in M,Idtd Aflas flatyryndat. arnk Scandiu?i.o. 14:24-35Hm, S.H. 1992. Environmental i.terpretationr a pra.ti.al g de for pople with big ideas md smalt budgetsHand, l.L. 1980. Humn disturban e in wesrern gull lnas o..id.,r,lis l,rcrs colonies md possible mplifi.ation by

inrraspdifi. predarion. Eiolo8ical Co scfldkon 1A:59-61Hatron M. A & Buder M. G. 1994. Rspome ro food we! mipnlarion in a shalk w wateriowl latc. H.llarbit lqia 279/

240:457-466.Harbimon, I. & SelwFr, I. 1993. Wotet skiing ond th! dtnannent a litdntuft raitu. London, Sports Coun.ilHardlrE, I.R. & Cooler D.R 1980. Mute Swm on the Warweickshire Avon - a srudy of d{line. I lidfoui 31: 29-36.

Hanadine, I. 1983. Slort shoorin8 in the Unit€d Kingdom: som facts md fi8ures. Ini Leeuwenb€r, L & Helbm, L (eds.)

Worting Graup on Cone Stotisri.s. Proceedings oI 2nd DehnA of IUGB. 6-7 Oct 1982

Huis, H.1., Ijdowski, J.A. & Worden, D.J. :1981. Water qtalitlr problems md mnaAenent of a urban waterfowlsanctuaty. latnrl of wildl4i Mdnryement 45: 501 507

Haslam, s. M. 1978. Rnt flnnts: the nodophy tc8etdtio, ./urt /..r^es. CLrP, cmbrids€Hawke, C.J. & Jose, P.V. 19%. Rddlxd Moflagdent kr Ca ffi.iat afld wi\llif! tntetsh. Royal So.iety for tle Prot€ti@ oI

Birds, Sandy, 212pp

REFERENCfS

Hawkins, F. :1991. E piro,,,.ntal edu.nt ,n onA inftrprctatior. peat pdk Joinr ptrming BoardHenmeyer, M,E., Nelso& I.W., Batr, B D J. & Caldwett, P.J.1993. WiterJalat @setu.tian ad rioti?.^ity. Mdwer lish &

Wildlile ConfMce 1993, MisouriHend, L & Clagghine, D. 1996. Restotunnn ol i,enne solnon hahitnt.. Fishb';s T{n i.ot I{,,"aI 4. E.vilonmot Ag{cy

R&D Tehnic.l Report W!14. Environment Agemt BnstolH€rcdia, B., Rosc, L. & Paint€r, M. (€ds.)19%. ci,tally Tlrcatded Eitd. in Ertupe. Council oI Euope SrrasbolrgHill, D.A. 1984a. Facturs affe.ting nesrinS success in the Mall d a.d'Itftcd duck. Onis $.nntliBrico 15:175 12Hill, D.A. 1984b. Popnlatim regulation in th. Mallard Anos platytvnd@. Ioltnrl al Aninat Eca!,gy 53:191-202Hill, D-, Blmr, Pl. & Lambton , S- r'987a- rhe jI..ts af @oterbosed nr tian an tui\dftun_ Roy, S.ciery for the protection of

Hill, D.A., WriSht, R. M. & Strcel M. 198%. Suruival of Malldd ducklings,4,G plarylryd.s and .ompetition with fishfor iNertebrares o. a floodcd gavel quarry in EnSlan{i /r4129: 159167

Hill, D., Hockin, D., Pn.., D.,'fn.ke., c., & MoEis, R. &:lreweek, J. 197. Bnd dcturbance imprcving rh. qlatity mdutility of disrubmce rcscar.h. l.unol oJ Afplirl Ecalw 34:275288

HMffi. 1994a. Biadiae$itu. fiL U( A.tio, PL,. HMSO, t-ndonHMSO r994b. S,sr"ifldrle Dmdopndt. Th. UK Strateq!- HMSO, LondonHMSO. 1995 Biodo.Eiry. The LrK Slering Croup Report. Volume 1 & 2. HMSO, LondonHo&in, D., Ounsted, M., conna& M., llill, D., Kellq, V. & Barker M.A. 1992. Exmimrion of the ejfects of disruban..

on bn{b with rcferd.e to its impoitm.. in ecological assessnenrs. /o!r,,i "/r,"iro,fl trn Mdnngendt 36: 253-2a6Hollis, G.E. & Ionee T.A. l9El. Elrope d th. Medittrmem Basin. rL linlayso4 M. & MlH, M. (eds.) Werlflds. IWRB,

Stmbndge. Ia.rs On lil., O{fodHolloway, 5. 1996. fl," Histdncal Atks al Bredi g Ends i Bntuin ontl belonds: 1875-1gAO. T. & A.D. poyse, LondonHolres, I.S. & Clement, P. 1996. Fish tdting birds: ptucedifl8s of a {nnqr k tnitu status, intenctians uih lshLries nnd

l@rsi,3 6s!es. lIK Nattre Conservation No. 15. INCC, P.terbo.ouah] IMka V. 1961. An aftempt at a diEt inv€stiEation oI rhe innnee of the Ca4 sid< on the botrom fama of r,o pohds.

Veth- hte ot- Verein. Linnol, \7y,732736 II9H!8hes, E. & Grussu, M. 1995. The .!ddy duct in Euope ad rhe thrcat ro the Whiie-headed Du.k. Bnrn,,t ai/ds ifl

'1991-92: L7 79

Ilughca, 8., Beran, R.M., Bowler J.M., Stil1, 1., Carcs, D.N., Marquisr M., Heah, R.D. & Bruce, J.H. 1999. Idediz8b?ntuitut af f.;h .ann\ bnds ifl G/ear Af,&i,. Wetlads Advnory Seric/tnstitute of Tdrerdal Eotogl report ro DEm.

HuSget, D. 1992. Ioreslrdre Eishkg fot Sh. fs]1 and Brit- Royal Sdiery for rhc Prctection of lirds, Sandy.HtAAett, D. t995- A tditu al Cn6tal Znne Managdtent ptuti A t5ponse tn dE Dqattnent al ttu Enononnentl miaa ol bye-

ltu tukiflg potuen in the coast l tune. Royal Stiety for the Prortrrion of Birds, Sdr.ly. 76pp.Hurbert, S- Il., Loayza,W' & Moreno, T. 1986. Elsh Flamingo plar*ton inrera.lions in ihe peflvi.. And6. ti,lnol. &

Oceanog. 313: 45? 468Hume, R.A. 1976. Rca.tions of golddeyes to boarinS. antis|1 Birds 69:77y779tnt(rutimal Union for the Conwation of Narue. 1992. Glabal Biotliwtsity.

'tatus aJ dE Enlrl's a,"i,S R6orr6. Chapfrd

& Harl (Kuwe4. 614 pp.Ivmor, F-M. 1986. The impa.t of dGtubme on the LapwinS's in.rbati@. Dn"sn Om. ahtn. Titlssl,. AO:97-102IWAAC 794i. Water enlow and r\. d.sigh ol E.redtionnl uatd .rul. lnland watemays Ammfty Advisory Comcn, lritGh

,akob.rm, B. 1988. skumnnSsiaSim pa skalinsen. Narurpejling.r (.d. H. Meltufte), pp.162t66 sk@ aJ Notursq8tse ,Miljoministeiet, Demark

Jakob.s! 6. 1993. Indvnker jaSt pa tuglcbertmds haetti.t t? vot EryleJoutu s t1p|.7: 62-64

James, T.l. 1992. The {ologi.a1 approa.h kr gravel pit rcstorano . Minerol Plm iflg 53:7627Ictrka, H. 1986. Jasdstr€ckenauswenmS de. sro.ksren (Atus plarynryrchos) i.inem Reviei des Musrcrlandes in

Nordrlein-Wesdalen. zeihs.hnlr Jur Josduisse s.hafr 32: q 96

Joensen, A.H. & Madss, i. 1985. Waterfowl and raptois wintedng in wetlmds of westem crcece, 1983-85 N,r,/dIuuottlica 27: t69-20Q

Jones, T.A. 1989. Sleld,.rr i" &e Se.tn Enuary, Ma!-r',qtsr 1989. Unpublished rcport, The WildJowl & Werlands ]rusrJmgius, H. & Hirecb U. 1979. llcrzfrequeMddugen tei Btutvogla in calapagos .ls Folge von SroruSen dur.h

Ban l@. Jotrnat of ornithotag! 720:299-370Kadk, J.A. 1979. NitroS€n and phosphotus dymns in inl d frcshwater wetldds. Pp.1741.In: !{DllDut, T.A. (ed.).

Wntdl\ol ond Wetlands - An Ifl tu3l,r.1 R@re,. La Cross Printing, Wis.onsinKadlec, l.A. & Smith, L.M. 1992. Habitat @gement for breeding areas. In: Ban, B.D., Afron, A.D., Anderson, M.c.,

Davison-Arrkney, c., lohnsor! D.H., Kadlec, I.A. & KrapLL c.L. (edr. E.o/o3y dd naMS. mt of bt..Lliry uotettuLUnive6iry of Mimesota Press, Mi.neapolis md London. pp. 590-610

Keller, V. 1989. Variations in the respon6e of crcat Cr€st€d crebes Podi."ps ./isr,tus to hulrm disrurban.e a sjgn ofadaptation? rioioSi.ai Co,seroarm, 49:31 45

Kelle., V. 191a. Eff€c6 of hulrm disrurbancc d Eidd du.liinAs So,urerin ,,oll6si,u in d estwine habitar in S.orland.Biolqicnl Consematiot 5a: 273-22A

(ell.r, V. 191b. The elle.t of distul e fsm r@de @ the .listribution oI fedinS sftes of Eeere wintering in norrh-estScotland - Atuleo 79 :229 -232

Kcller, V. 1995. Effe.rs oI hrman disturb .e on birds - a lireratue rdiew. Dal Otri&ologisdE Beobachtd 92:3-34

Kcllc., V. 1996. Effecrs ud mmagemnr of disruban e by humm rdreational a.tivities. tn: Blrkm, M., Vesenr, I. van,Havel P., Ntadsei, J., TrolGt, B. & Mosd, M. (Eds.) Prdeedings ol tle Amtidae 2000 CorJerem€, Shasbou& Irane,5-9 D{ember 1994. GiD,n Ealne Snuaoge, Ci,n WiLlliJ. 13:1039104a

Keller, V.E., Gallo OFi U., PatleEon, LI. & Na€f Beal@r, B. :1998. Ieeding eas led by individual Pink f@tcd G@se

dound the I,ch oI Shathbeg, north€ast s.otlmd. /r'iur6@l 48: 52 @KeEhaw, M. & Cr swicl, P.A. 2003. Numbe6 of winrc.inS w.tu.birds j. Great & .in 1994/95 1998/9r I WildJowl

ad selected wate$i.ds. Eioloaidl o)rpro,ro, 111(1) 91-104

Kin& D. R. & Hun! G. S. 1967. Elfect of.a.p on veS.tation in a Lle Eri. Marsh. idumal oJwildlie l|lnnag t 37: l8l188.

Kiby, I.S. 195a. Wintcr populatio cstimltes tor seldted watdfowl spdies in lr ain. Biologi.ol Consetuntian n: tA9-t9ti

Kirly, I.S. 1995b Dishibutnh dnd dynami.s oI wintering waders in Britain with pdriculd reference to wcathn. PhD

ihesis, Open UnivmitYKnb, J.S., Anstin, G.E., Row.lifle, J.M., Pettifon R.A. & Cla*, N.A. 1996. Pop!/ation tllnr ns al Cafladn CeEe i Grcot

Btitrin ond ntpli nafls fat fut /. m,flasmoa. Report to Lhe Depai1nmt of ttu Envnomht, The Wildfowl & Wetlands

Trust/ British Trusr for Ornirholo8yKirby, l., Cle, C. & SeaSer, V. 1993. tmpact md extet of rccreatidal disturbme to wader ioosts on the Dee lstuary:

sofr. lreumrrEry resurts. rn: Davidson, N. & Rothwell, P (.ds.). Disturbmce to Wat,fowl on Lstudies. Wadr SrdyGroq B,ll.,ifl 68, Spe.ial tssue

Kirby, J.S., Del y, S. & Quim,I.L. 1994. Mute Swans in Great Britain: a review,.trrenr sr.tus and lonS-ierm E€nds.

Hqdtobiolagio 279/2a0: 467 4A2

Knby,I.5., Holmes, J.S. & Selle$, R.M. 1996. Cormorants as fish predatorsr an appraisal ol rheir .onsenaiion andmmagemot in Cr.at Britain. tsiologinL Chsctunno TS: 197-199

Kirby, J.S. & Lr.L, P.C. 1993. Spatidl dynami.s of wintering LapwinSs Md Golde. Plovers in Britain dd lreland, 1981

l20 82 to 1983 84. Bi/d Srudy 40: 38-5n

K y,I.S., Salmon, DC., Atkin$n Willes, G.L. & Crmwi.k, P.A.1995. tndex numbers for wat€rIowl popllauons.IILLong term trends in the .bundan.e oI winreing wildfowl in Great Britain, 1966167 t<, l99l/92. l.utkdl af AryliedE.o/o3y 32: 536-551

Keill, M.1,. 1993. Waterbird lehavioual respore€s to human dhturbances. r 4ldl', Sdefu Bulletin 2l: 37 39.

Koolh.as, ,\., DekinSa, A. & PieEm, T- 1993. Distu.ban.. of foraging (nots by air.raft in rhe Dutch Waddd Sea inAlglst O.tober 1992. l4/ad"r Stutl! Group Bullenn 6A:24-21.

Korschgm, C.n. & DanlSren, R.B. 1992. Humm disturban.es of waterfowl: .auses, ellets and lrregement. Ir CNss,

D-11, Grl.J. Wnterfalal Ma dqm@t Hndboot. USDI F'ish Wndife Seri.e tn Crosse WI, USAK pu, G. L. 1979. Nxtnrio, af Jenqk hbbling tlrcks dhinS ftprod\.tion. Pto..19n Symp. Madiso., WI, NC Sec, The

Wildlile Socieiy.

Kremenrz D.G., Cmoy, M.J., Hins, J E. & Per.ival, H.L 1988. The effets of hmiing on suNival of American Bla.kDt ks.Iou ol aJwiltllf! Mnnqem.flt 52:214-226

Lamara V. A. 1975. DiS6tive a.tivitles of Carp d a major contribuior to rhe nutimt loading oI ldkes. Valr. i,t flar.Vdein LinDl. 79: 2467 6a

Lmd Us Coreultmts.1994. bnpa.t of fticaio atuilt,F. R&D P.oiecl498. Natioal Riv6 ,\nthority. 80PP.

Lme,B-&P isi! D.191.,4ction Pldfl fot th. Asin /Ausholirn ElWoV. A.a ponent aldt AritPacif. Wotdbitd StrateS!.

www.wetl ds.org/lwC/awc/waterbirdstrategr/Llws, A.R. 1997. Waterfowl hlnnn8 and codtal zone Magement h the United Kingdom. Gibid Fame Sau'oge, Cntte

Wildl. 14: 237 244

Laws, T. & Lecocqr Y. 1996. The .ontribution of E@lean hmting oiSanjsnons in Amrida€ coNNatio.. In: Pmeed-

ings of the Anntidde 2000 conference, strasbo!.& Fran e, 5-9 Deembd 1994, M. Bilka,I. v v6sm, P tlavet, J.

Madsen, B. Troltiet & M. M(rg, Eds. cibier lar e salaage, Gone wildl.,73: 1257-7260

Levenson, H. & Koplirr I.R. 1984. EfIe.is of human a.livity on productivity oI nesrig osprcys. louttrl of WidlifeMd ryeflent 4a: 7374-1377

Lewis, G. & Willim, G. 1984- Ria$ nnd wildLi|i Handbfu&. RSPB/RSNC, LiNolnLiddle, M.J. & Scoraie, H.R. 1980. The.II..ts oI ie.reation on lreshwater pl ts md animals a revi.w Bio/o8,.ai

Co smdtian 17: 183 206Litrle, B. & Iurness, R.W. 1985. I-ong-distan.e moult migration by British Goosmders Metgrs netgaaset. RinSing A

Miironon 6: n 82

Lloyd4iIfith, R. C 1975 The aolagi.al anequdes ol grautul bninng in E kntu uoE^ i a gt@el it at Brod.sldton rithpatticulor relttene ta ik effect on it distnbuian ol the benthic inaentbrnte kunr. iJnryl,lished Ph. D. ihesis University ofHull

Lopez, A. & Mundklr, T. (cds.).7997. me Asian V'lrtetfoul Ce s s 19941996 Retrlis oI rhe Coordinated Wate.birdCeNus md an Overicw of the SrarE of Wetlmds in Asia. W.tlands lntcmationil, Kuala LlmPu.

Lmdin, A. 1986. 'l'amnarens utveckling som IagelEo cft€t 1E77 s rcgleti,ng. FrSlot i Urylotd 13:7A7 124.

Madm, J. 1985. Impa.t oI disturbance on field ltilisation of Pinkjooted Gese in west Iudm4 Domark. BioloEi.4/

Cons.tu4,io, 33: 53-63

Madsen, l. 1988. Autum leeding ecology ol herbivoioc wildfowl in the Danish wadden sea and imPa.r oI food

suppljes .nd shooiing on movements. D,r,sl Ro,a of Gdne Biolag! 73

Mads6, J 1995. Impacts of dGtuban.e on miSiaiory wate owl ft,s 137: 67-74

REFERENCES

Madsen, I. 1998a. Erperim.ntal refuSes for migrarory wate owl in Dmish werlan.ls. t. Basetine assessment of thedisturbu.e effects DI re.r..tiona1 a.rivfties. .lo,rfldi ,Applild Ealartt 35: 3tl 397

Madsen,I. 1998b. Expeiimental retuges for mightory wnrerfost in Dmsh wett ds Tests or hunting disturb.n.eefl<ts. Io mnl Applied Erolory 35:39A4I?

Ma<,*r! r., Bogcbjs& E., Homis, J.P., Krisrssen,I.B. & Ilikke, J. 1992. Forsogsr*rar Ulvshate-Nyord: Resulraier aful9fPrincnln loso ql Da natl. u Ddadn.,,8,+t fa\ti! Rdpp.. ,.: I bl

Madso,I. & Iepse( P.U. 1992. P.ssing rhe br.L ned Ior a Ilyway mmagem.nt pl for the Svalbar{l phl fooredGoGe Pp. 109 :r10. Ir vm Roomm, M. & Mader, J. (eds.). watrf@t antl Agndhlre: Rmiru rntl Future ptustjbb af nECrop Dnn0ge C.nli.t in Europe. IWRB Spechl Publi.ation 21_ IWRB, StinbndSe

Ma4€r I. & Pihl, S. 193. lagt- 08 fostynelssfric kcm€omader for vandtuglelD mdk. Dmarkc Miljom.lesoSaho.FdgLig R ppott l1a DMU No- 72-

Madsen, I., Iox, A D., Moser, M. & Noer, H. 1995. Th. tnpa.t af H atiry Distatbrn.t o the Dyndnica aJ WntetbinPoutldtions: A Reaitu- Flepdt prepared for rhe Commrq.hn ot ihe Europ.rf Communihes Natro.at EnvnommralResearch lrEtitut/htemtional Wat rfowl ad Werlands Rese ch lrear

Mldss} J., & !o! A. D. 1995. Impacrs of hmtinS dGrurb.n e m waierlirds a re\iew_ Wiltltift Biolapt 1:193-2A3Madscn, J., cra.lnerr, c. & For, A.D. (cds) 1999. cno{ tnputattuns ol tht wr\k prhot,tt. A tfltru af.tntus ond

disrahrd,. Wetlmds I.t.mational ptrbl, No.48. NERI, Kalo, DemdtMAI'F 1999 cad" of Ptucnce fat the sot'e us. oJ p.sncides M Entns ond Haldings. MArF/Heatth & saJery cohmisiov

DETR.Maher, M. 1982. Respome by waterfowl to hrnting pressuer a prefihin y study. A srtutiafl WikltiJe Reatch 9:522 .,3tMaltby, E. 1991. Wetlmds d rheir !alu6. Lr F-idaysorr, M. & Mos, M. (e.16.) Wertands. Intcmational warerlowt md

Wetl ds Research Bureau, Slimbridge. Fa.ts Oi File, OxIordMam, !. A., Iohnen, w' C. & Werel, R. c. 1994. Nrh.imt addftio$ ro laks m.l BeNoiE: lr.di.tjng then eftu! @

productiviiy ed water quarity. Ilx K@k€s,I. ]. (Ed.). Arldtu Eitds ik 1t t'nphn Web .f Lok6 DtuL)un nL. in Hlttuobnnogll96. Kluwer A.adcmic Publishffi, Dordaht

Mdchmt, J. H., ttudsm, R, C ter, S. P. & Wllifiingrorl, Ir_1990. po\nand Ttdts in Brnift Er.cdifl8 !i,4. British TrrsrIo. Onithology / Nat!re CnreerarLy Colmil

M,rquis, M. & C ss, D.N. 1994- Aaian Piscirotes: BBis t'or potny. NRA R&D Note 267. N&\, Brnrol

Marquiss, M., C $, D.M, Amst on& I-D. & c diM, R.7$8_ Fi.t1ann8 Bnds and Snltuni* in Sn nnd: tpat on lshutug btu|s rcstua.h (199t97) to the Safish Ofre A$ielture, Entitunndt and Fish7ies D?,,rn.,r. IIE, B..chory mdFreshwatd Fisheries ljboratdy, Pitlochry

Maman, D., Dieiz M., & Daan,5- 198j6- Patntiotng aJ otdg! fat noult in thz Kesbet Eob nnn culus_ In:.Ihe dnnuol cy.t"al thc K.strel Ealco tinflLncalt!, €d. D. Masma& ph.D. Thesis, Univsiq, of croningery The Nethdtands

Mast r, T.1,. & OplinSer, C 5. 1984. Nesring .nd brmd raing rotogy of ub watsfowl population (,4ms ftaryrlryn.JDsand 8/,rtd ."ndddsN) in lldtom Pennsylvmia. pro.?.dings tt the pensyl?aflid Acatlm! .y' S.,fl.. 58: 175 t8O

MarheF, R.c., Watson, S., Stonc, R. & Monrgomery, W.L 2l]Ol]. A study of the impact of huhan djstubm. m Wigeon,4,,s /dcldpd md Brent csc Blnnta hemi.ln htutn o ltish sea Lnh. W,tdrzt 51: 67-81

Mayhew, P.W. 1985. Ir" rri"di"g .@lagy onA b.hn !,ur aJ t^/igeo/. IrhD Thesn, Unive.sity ot classowM.Intyre, J. W. 1994. Loons in lreshwarer lakca. In Kerel es I j {Ed ) Aquah. Btrds in tit rt|Fhr rNeb af Lak$:

Deoelopme ts in Hlt abiology 96. kluwer A.ademi. Publishers, Doidreht. pp393-414

McQuee[ D ]. 1990. ManipualthS lalG .olmmfty *ructure: wheE do we go from hare7 Fftli/,uatet tsjatw 21..6t 62t)Meile P. 1991. Die Aedotm8 der <<CemeiNhaftlichen WMjaSd>> tur ubwinrmd€ Wdsetroget am EmarinSer

Be.ken- Oft. B.o&. 88: 27-55Mene, P & Kuijko, E. 1991. FactoB affectinE ihe numbo md disrriburion of winteinS ge€ md sme impli@tioB for

their .onsd,tio in flanders, BelSiuh. a/dea 79r 1€ 158Meltofie, H. 1980. Shooting disruban.e of waterfowl. Dz,st omikologisk Edennlas Tidsktil T6: Zt-35Meltofte, H. 1994. Hlntjr1g regisbaiio. on VaemenSen., West Iurland, 192&1990. Da"st Ot . Earn. Tittsskt BB: 23 32Menendez, C.T. & Bel l, M. C- 7996- nLe d.relopnrent of Canington Wd tet,s tuateftid a d iflturtebrote popatatianr, aith

tee n doti s aa the tusentairk noflagenent Jat redeanoh. Report ro Severn Trcnr Water Lrd., Wetlan.ls Advisory

Mettit' 4,. 1994. Wetlnds, Ifld str! nd l,\,tildlile. A nontdt af tti cipks itd ptuciti.r_ I\e Wi tdfowt & Werlan<1s Trust,

Mrkola H. & Lind, E.A. 1974. Hriluodm sorehta ja nnden k1lrt ytymisesta mrasryskau.len ,tkaessa. So,zd liistd 25:20-24

Mikoll I., Mic$inm, M., tFh&oin6, E. & I€hrila, K. 1994. The effe.Lc of dntEbano.ause{l by boatins on sunilat andbehaviour of Velvet S.oter Mrlanitta fEca dlcklinff. Biolagidl hiseftotian 67:119124

Milne,1.4.19%. tuhnphnanoh dt the Lo.h ol Sttuthbeg: n toiar of distjry litentut afld tnta.SNiety for the tlotection oI Bhds, EdinburSh

Unpublhhed report, Royal

Ministry of Agricultue, Iisheries ,nd tud 1999. Ctid.li@Jat uE u*.f hnbitin5mwc.t a at ne Mt tco rses nnd lokes.

Mintel 1994. A.tinq hdiA"ys, Mint L Mnrkting lfltellEcne. Mintel tnrer.arional crcup Limited, Lon.lon.Mit hel, C.D. 1994. IlE TrmperEr Swan (Cysu,s D,.d,,r/). Irr poole, A. & Citl, F. {eds.) ltu Bnds ol Na*h Atuna, No_

105. The A.admy of Narual S.io.es & The An..i.an OmithDlogists, UnihMtctull, C., Cromie, RL. & Brom, M.J. 1993. M,/tdld ,s patentitl disBe De.to$: n uss study ar Siifltidjs. INCC R€porr

162. A report by The Wndowl & Wetlmds TrEr h thc Joint Nature CoNen ario Commrttee, pete orolgtr UK

l2t

122

Mitchell, J.R., MGr, M.E., & Knby, J.S. l98li. D{lins in rh. fridwinter comts of wad.s roosting on rh. Dee stuary. Bi/dSrady 35: 191-198

Moller, A.P. 1992. S"a,./"e. NaturhGtorisk Museum Adrus. D.nmarkMooij, I 191. NumbeB .nd distibuiion of grey g€se (Emus t,!e) in th. Fedsal Republi. of cemmy, wirh sp<ial

ref€ren.e to the l,wer Rhine reEin- Atd.a 79: 12-\-t34Morris, R. r95. An o,l dro af tlu attithologiul cafltpon nt al maitohndtot stotenent. dn, n pa.r,ss.ss,.rrs. Mft thesis.

O ord BrooL* Unive6ityMorzer-B ,ns, M.F. 1967. 'ne inlutne oJ ftcrcatkflal actiritns on nquan. bi./.:Moses. I : Taalnilr n Ntu Rctanonship oJ Man

ond Nat ft in Trt p.tute La ds Pdn t_ EcabSnal iarynet aJ rc.tdtion nnLt tawist Lpoh tcnperote eniro nents. IUCNPubli.ation (new sdi6) Z part L

Moss, B. 1983. 'r'he No.Iolk Broadland: erpdimmts in the retoution oI a .omplex wetl d. Biolo3iat R@!cs 58: 521-561Mos, B., Madgvjck l. & Phnlps, C. 1996. A G"id. rd ,r. Rcstontian oJ Nlhi.nt lnri.hed Sh,rm /rks. W.W. Hawes, UKMud6e, G.P. 1983. Ihe incidm.e and significmG of lead pell.r poisoninS in Eritish wildJowl. Bioi. Cors. 27: 331372Mud8e, G.P. 1989. NBl, srooting ofuildhtul in Creat Britai,L A asisnmt of its [email protected], intdsil,! nfld distttbance inpa.t.

WWI reporl io thc Natre CoNran y Comcil CsD Reporr No. 987Murphy, K.l & Pe ... 1987. Habiat modific.tion associated w h f.eshwarer angting. pp 31-46. Inr Mafttand, p.S. &

'Iumer, A.K. (eds.) 1987. Ar3li g and Wildlile in Etuhlnteb- ITE syhposiu No 19.Murphy, K. J., Willb, N. l. & Nolor, R. 1995. E.otogi.al impa.ts and tuageme.r ot boat tlalfic on navtgable inlm.l

watetrays. l[ Harpd, D.M. & Fqguson, AJ. D. (eds.) TI. {alognal b^.i\ lat rio* nMg.r.,r. Wne1, & So.s, Chi.hest€rMusgrove,A,Pollitt,M.,HalLC.,H€atu,R.,Holoway,S.,Ma.sharlp.,Robi]Mn,I.,&Cran!||i.k,p.21cn.jh.Wetldntl

Bird Stmat 7999-21D0 Wdftul and Wadet Counts- Slimbridse, BTO/WWI/RSPB/INCC.National Trusr. 1995. ()pen Coutryside. Rryorr o/ rtu A-.ss R@iel tval.l.iry pNt!. pafis A-C l.he Narioral Trusr, Lond@NCC/RSPB. 1988. Rai@ d/ tlB ellects al Eqution an uaterbitds . erclo*d uatet boni.s. NCC Chiej ftimrGr Dirc.ror.te

ComGsiDned Re€arch Report No 967

Nettleship, D.N. & Duffy, D.C. 1995. The Doubte{rested Cormoranr Biologt, ConseNarion and Mdagement. Colo,i,l,,r'atul,i/ds 18. Speial Publicarion l.Colonial Waterlird So.icry

Newl,ol.L C. 1975. Heibi.ides in aquati. systems. Broi,aicol Co seflntion 7:97-71aNi.hols, l.D. 1991. Responses of North American duc& loputalions h dplotarion h: pedns, C.M., Lcbreto& I-D. &

Hnons, G.l.M. (€ds.) Brl Porulotiot SLudies; thcn R.bance to Con*tuanon and Mnflagerenr. OrJord Univsjty prcsNi.hols, J.D., Cotuo],, MJ., ,^ndsson. D.R. & Bdmh.m, K.p. 1984. CompeNarory mortality in waterfowl populariom:

a review of the evideme and inplication for reseai.h and mmagement. Trafls. N. ,4ftd Nar. R6. Co,, 49: 53t554Nicoll., 1,. 1995. ShootinS ahead with codtal in iatv€s in th€ UK. Pp. 91 96. In: Healy & Doo.ly (Eds.). Dt .riors i,

Euat@n Co6tal Monag dl. Samda PublishinS Limited, C diSanNilsso., L. 1972. kcal dntribufi@, f@d choice d food consmprion of divinA du.lc @ a South Swe.lish Lrke. Oitu!

23: A2-97

Norrisr D.W. & Wjlson, H.J. 1988. Distu$mce d fldk size chan8es in Whit€ Fronred Ceese winterinS in lr.land.

Norihumbrian Cohty Com.il. 1999 Mrnaging ttu Beruickshite ond Natth Narthm,berland Const Ewapeon Manfle sitc.Wo&ing Dnjl. Northmbrian Watcr, Durhm.

Nl\4.79%a. I pact of fu.reatira o, u,ldlr, R & D Nore 498. Narional Rivers Authdity, Leed, UKNRA. 194!. Sodor..,o,,i. r.,itu ol,4 8li,E. NOP Rese .h. R&D Relort 5O1/1/T Narional tuvers Authorty, Ieds, trKOgitvie, M.A 1975. D,.&s ol Brihh atul Eunt.. 'r . & A.D. Poyser, l+rkhamredOwe., M. 1993. The UI< shooting disruban e prqect. W,d.t Srudy Crcup Butleti 6A:3F 46Owan, M" A&i]:llJc$rl es, C.L & S6hD& D.G. 1986. (2nd Ei1-)- ltfidjatl in Oat Bnkin. C.ntJjldge Univ6ity I1s, Canb.idgeOwen, M. & Black, I.M. 1990- Wrkttul Ecola&1. Blackjc & lbn Ltd., clrsgow & LondonOwo, M. & Thom6, c.I. 1979 Ihe feedinE (Dlogy md .onsvarion of wigsn winrerinS at the Ose Washs, EnSland.

Io nat al Atlplien Ecotogll 76: 795 at9Owen, M & William, c. 1976. Winte distibution d lra! at ftquiremants of WiEeon in Brtain. ,M/d/dol 27: 83_90G{ea, N.W. 1977. Respome of winterin8 Blent ceese ro htrftd disrurb.nce. Witdlrut 28r 514Pain, D.I. 1992. taad poisoning i. w.&rfowt a rsiM. rn: D.l Pain (Ed.). rc2d /,bonin8 i, zraredtul rloceitinSs or rhc

tnrernational Wate.fowl d W.tlands R*dch Bueau Workshop, Brrseb, Belgim. IWr.lB Spe.ial puuicarion 16.

Pamplin, W.L. 1986. Cooperative efforts to halt popularion da.lines oI g.cse nesrjns on Alas*!,s yukon KuskokwimDelta. Ttuns. N. Aner- Wildl. A Nat- Resa r C1,nJ.57: 4A7-506

Pd, D. 1974 the effect on wildJowl oa sailing ar tslmd Bm Redon. Snrsy Bild Repart t97i:7+ZAPaton,I.B., Siorr R., Dclroy, L. & !est, L. 1992. Pattm to the disnibuiion and abundtue of Mallards, rra.i6c Black

D$1" dd rhprr hlb,iJ. in.outr qu.hJl.' n lesT \o,th Ad.t,alna Om adlry, I trir.tl]Pattssor, i.I. 1997. Inplt of nutienls ro rh. St Fe.gus Wnrer Lo.h by DosrinS birds. pp. 15-20. In: R .hie, W. &

Knghm, L. (eds.) Ir. St. adsus Co6tnl Etuituflmtftt: Manitotin9 nfld A$6nan oJ fi. Aastut Dunes ot th! Nottu Sea CasTdninair Sr. Ier8re. Abe..lem Univmity R*rrch & lndustrial Serices Ltd, Al,redeen.

llttersm, LJ-, Cosgrove, P. & Doyle, P- 1996. Wntet q dlity afld input aJ n tidh in a,intd by n6nng bndr ot the Wintet Loih,St. Eeryut, wintet 7995n6. Unpul,lished rcpo4 Aberdco Univ€Eiry

P.droli, J. C. 1982. Adivity anJ time budget oI TrJt.d Du.ks on Swns bke! duing winrer. rr'ldl@t 33: 105 112Pehrssm, O. 1974. Nutrition of shall ducklinSs re8{larirg b@din8 d area reproductive ontllt jn the l,n8-lailed

Dlck Cldgda hyemarC. Pm..ediag! oJ 17,t htemakonal Canga\t of Cam. Bntaqists, Stockhnth,,,l t\, 259 61

Pehftsm, O. 1982. An ealdmcnr.l study ol eg8 d du.UinS size and subsequmr survival md groa.rh rarc .e a resultoI food quariry of laying Mallard!. T/,,s. Lrem. Co"8. cnne Biol t4.;193 202

I'ehrsson, 0.1988. Prcdukrion av elsirom eller Iagetoda I den Iramrida HomborEasjon ? Vt ta,llurt.t 4Z:252-262.

Per.iv.l, S. M., Ardersoi, c. Q. A., Davcy, P. R. & Pnital, T- 7996- Ttdtds ih uil.lklat utLbe$ a dhu ting actiaiq atLitdisfatne, NE Erylond. U^publGhed m..usdipt, Univereity oI Suderl d,.

Pc.orov, J 1993. cost l,ercf t rnatrsis af ehlitu ncn ll chr,gs. cmbridse Univers y PKS, c bridSe, U(Phillipt V. !. :1991. Po.lwd use oI chnonomid .i.h feeding habitat in winter. Bi/d Stud! 3a:77a 722.Pienkowski, M.W. 1983. The impact of rourism on .oastal heeding shor€bi.ds in westm md sourhem Europe: an

inrrodlcti@ to gmsal dinssiol ln: Sh.rebituls afld Lary.l\atetbntL Cinsmation- C@nnsion of the Euopem Com-

Pienlowski, M.W. 1993. The jopact of toui on @sral br€din8 wadcB in westem md souihem E rope. m uveniew.Wad.t St dv Cturf Bullrtin 68:9296

Pientowski, M.W & Pi.r*o{sLi A. 1983. WS:G prqei on the m@emnt oI wader ppulatiom in wesrern Eu.ope, eightprogess report. Wdd Sldy Ctoup BulLth 3a: 13-22

Pide, G.I., Spra, C.l. & Stuart, E. 193. The eJfe.t of IishinS on the dGiri!trtion md behaviou Df warerbirds in theKutut dea oI tilG Soni<la, southem rhailand. Bial- Conr- 66:23-31-

Pierce, H.G. 1989. Warer skiing d th. mlir(ment. Proc. World Water Skiin8 Untun. 4n, S€mind on EuopeM Wat.rSkiin& Athtu, Gree.€

Piersma, T. :1987a. Population tumovs in Sroups of wi.g moulting waterbnds: ihe use of a natual mdker in crearCrcsted Cebes. W,idr@l 39: 37 45

PGrena T. 198%. Hop, skip or rump? Cmtraints on miSrarion oI Ar.ft wad6 by fedin& ranoing md flight sped.

PieBm, T. R., Lindebooa, H, & Vd eerdo, M. R. 1993. ForaSinS rhythm oI Crcat Crested crebcs l,odi.eE .risrarlsadjusied to djet vdiatim in the vdtical dntdbution of then pr€y Os,rru gwlarrs in a shalow eurrcphic Iale in TheNetherlands. Oc.oloji. 76:481 486 123

Piersma, T., Gudmundsson, C.4., Davi.lson, N.C. & Morrisory R.LG. 1996. Do Arctic brcedinE Red Knors (Calidriscdutus) a..umdate sleletal .alcinm before egglaying? Conodirn lattul al Zaolagy 74:257 ,,61-

Plattueuw, M. & Henketr, R. 198a. W.tobilds md aquatic r@ation ai Lal@ IFslhee., I1p Netherlmds: rhe porenrialbr cq|lli.t. Wildfuan 1A:

^0-224Platteeuw, M., & Henks, R. 1998b. Possible impacts of distubdce of wate$nds: individuals, carying capacity dPopulations. WildJool 48: 25-236

Pollitt, M., Cf,mwicle P. Mus$ove, A, HarL C., Heam, R., Robin$n, J. & Holtoway , S- 2003. Th. Wetln Bird Sufleq20004r wtt1k1.l a wadd corflrs. slihbridSe, BTo/wwT/RspB/INcc.

Pollitt, M., HaI, C., , Holoway, S., Hearl R Mdshal, P. Mus8.ove, &, Robituor, J., & CraEwiclr P. X)A3. 'flz WetlandBnd Sunley 7999 2000 wilqtun ond wodet cowts. slimb.idgc, B IOIWWI/RSPB/INCC.

l'ntct, A.). 19A7. Estunry btuls oJ Btitoh ond Iftla d.'1. & A.D. Poyscr, CaltonPratcl -^.J. :1989. RinAed Ploret Chttotlnu hinndblneeding population of the United KinSdom in :1984. Bnd Stu.ly 36:

154 159

Praet! I P. & Maclmes, C.D. 1980. Imily d other social 8rotrps in Snow G@se- Wldlik Ma oSrqns 77:1a6Prit.hard, D.E., Housds! S.D., Mudge, G.P., Galbraith, C.A. & Pienrowski M.W. (ed.-) 1992- LLportont Bjtd Atas ifl the

UK ithdiflg the Qtanflel lslaflds and r\. IsL! al Mnn. PSPB, S tdyRamsar Convcntion Burca!. t988. Qi nentiat on W.tlonds oJ Internotional hLpanan.e E pecioll! ns Waterlaul Habitat.

Proeediqs ol the tund nectiry ol th. C.'nJiren.. of the Contro.ting Potties, Rertru, Ca,d,, 1982 Ramsd ConventionR"reax Sw Terl,nd

R,l']|]r'tr convenrion Bureau. 799n- Ptuc*diflgs al tu Fourth Meenng ol the confercn.e of ttu caflttunag Padi.s (Mo treut)_Ramd Convenhon Bu€au, Gl .I, Switzerland

Ratud convmtion Bueau 7993. Pto@dings of it FiJIh MNnry af r\e Conlarenc. oJ crnrrrrifl8 Ptr 'ss ((ur,/o). P\,nqCoNmtion Bueau, Glmd" Switzerl d

Ramsl C@vmtion Bureau 2AO0- Wetland Volaes ond Fn rio,s. Ramsd Cmvention Bueau, clmd, SwiizolandR.t lific, D A. 19n. A nnt t tonsematian taim Cmbridge University Pr.sr Cahbnds€R velin& D.G. 1984 Cee and hunt6 oI Aldkls Yulon D€lra: Mffigem.nt p.oblem ad polirical dilmmrs Tr,,s.

N. ,\nd. Wildl. & Nar. ResaaL Conl 49: fi5-575Rees, E.C. & Rowclific, J.M. 1945. Cahryolntiu a@llsis aJ E dtdt ta uhidt nDanng norklit! is contpdsatory at additiDe in

difet t pop lanhs dfli .ne ,,st ,.4i ReFort to the Joint Natue CoreeNarion ComDitt€s The Wildowl & Werlands

RevEs, H.M., Dill, H H & H.wkins, A.S. :1968. A case study in Cmda coose m.nagefrene the Mississippi Valleypopularion. ln: trinc, tr.L. & SchoenJel4 C. (eds.). CaMd, C@se Mntugewnt. Demtar Educational lnc., Madison

Rehfirb M.M., Clark, N.A., LanSstoo R.H.W. & Grehwoo4 lJ.D. 19%. A Buide lo the prevision of rtugs for wados:aftrlysis oI 30 ycm oI rin8rng data hom the Wasll Endnd. laumal aJ Applied Ecolov 33: 67t6A7

Reichho[, I. 1973. BegrundmS einer oko]ogischen Sbategie der Jagd ,uf Entm. AE. Orn. ces. Bayem 12: 237 247

ReiterSm-Mccra.ken, J. 1998. Paiicipanon ifl lttd.tie. Wnrld Banlg US]\RiddingtoD R., Ha$aI, M., lae, S.I., Turner, P.A. & Waltars, R 1996. Tha impact of dntubm.e on the bchaviour and

osgy ludgets of Brot Geese BrMta b. bmi.la. Bltd Study 43:269-279

tudgill, S.C. & Io! A.D. 1990- CaU wokt "Lao

dk al udteitul ifl bertqn Eutupe- TlrRB Sp{ial Publi.rtion No. t3tuver RstoratiDn Centr. 1999. Mnrunl oJ Rier Restonlnr,. River Restorrtion Cmhe, Silsoe, Beds. tlKRobertson, R.J. & flood, N.I 1980. Effets of re.reatihal ue oI shorelins on b.ee.linA bird populatiom. C,nddiaz Iield

Noturolist 94:73L-134

Rose, P. M. & S.otr, D. A.1994. W.tefowl I'opllation Estinat€s. fllRB P,blie,ims 29, IWRD SlimtridgeRose, P.M. & S.ott, D.A. 1997. Waterfowl Poprldtion Estimates. Se.ond Ed ion. We aflds lntenotionnl Ptblnntion 11.

Wetlmds lniemational, WaSeninSen

RRC 1999. Ma,,al,/Rnur Restotanafl Te.hniqu?s. ]m.then..olk/muar.php.Ros, D. A. 1940. In. fsh ltrDesti8ahon, 1944 Atuaba*n Delt , ,4lrzlrd. Du.Is Uilimired Cmada, Wimipeg.RSPB/EN/ITE. 197. flr Wct Gffisl d C fi.: Mo ogi g Hoadpkifl dnd Caastal Wet cnss,,,ds r4r ddtrre. Royal So.ieqr

for the Prctection oI Bnds, S dy,254pp.RSPB/NRA/RSNC. 1994. The New tuv6 d Wildlil€ Hmdbook. Roy.l Society for the Prcte.tion of Bids, SmdyRSP!/BTO/WWT/INCC 2003. The state aJ the UK's binls 2002. RSPB, S,ndy,Russell, Lc., Dare, P.J., Eatorl D.R & Armtlon& I.D. 1996. An6 nt af the rnbkn of lsh &nng bnds ]n nfund lishens

in E glond antl Woles. Die.tante 01 Fish€ries Resedch, l,westoftSalath6, T. (cd.) 1991. Consing Migratory Dnds. ICBP Tc.fini.,l PrDl. No. 12. International Council for Bird Prcserv.

rio,r, CambiidgeSalmoa D.G. 1988. A late *mfrd surv.y oI Britdin's wildfo{|. WiUr?,1 39: 155,163

Salomonsei, F. 1968. The moult miSration. WildFal 19: 5-24

Salvig, I., Lausm, K. & Iril*e, I. 1994. SBeys oI hulrrm a.tivirie .n.l th€n eff€cts on numbe$ md distribution oIwaterlowl in the Dmish Wadden Sea. Op,rslid S,4?i. 6: 333-337

Sauo, I.R., taMence, I.S., CM, E.L., Coole G.W. & Anderson, V. 1990. Eapoimental Sr?tember duck hmting sedonsin Kenhrcky and Tmesee. Lx lredriclson, L.H., Bu6er, G.V., Havera, S.D., Crab.r, D ,^., Kiby, R.E. & Taylo., T.S.

leds.J Pncledings af ke Nark .Anen.at w@d Duik synqosi,fl, sr Lodir Minnesot,

124 Schneiddjacoby, M., Fre@1, P.,Iacoby, H., Knaiizsclr, G. & Kolb, K.H. 1991. The imp..t of hunting dist!.bance on .protected sPeics, the Whooper Swm at Lale Constmce. WildJen Suryldt. t t:37A-3a2

Schrike, v. 1985. Impa.t des activites huftaines su. le stattiomement hiverml des anarides en Baie du Monr Sainr-Mi.h.l. t imSehent n&tone, OJli.. Naianalc de ld Chase Mahtlly Eulletii 92: 77-23.

S.h"lz, R. & Snd. M 1993. khtsh Plov6 md kr(qtq emF'titos on smdy (16ts? Wad.r Srady ctotp Bu ent 6a: E&glS.on, D.A. & Rose, P.M. 1996. Atlas of Anatidae Populatio.s in Africa and Westem Evasia. W.uaruls Interndtionol

Publicitia 4lS.ott, R. 1983. The mnaSement of grrvel quarns foi wildlile at Dlng€ness, (ent. ln: Tlr. ptu eedinrs aJ d stinposiun o

r\. s bject oIl\lldlife a Maa-Mar. Ia/efidnds. ARC Wildfowl Cmtrc, Creat Li.Io "

Milton (eynsSeagrN,e C. 1988. ,44!nt ac,.l L,,r/ol. Iishing N.ws Books, FamhamS€ s, I. 1988. ReEional arxt sedonal v ianoG in the in ideme of l.d poisonjng in dre Muie Swm, Cy8,,rs olor, in rclation

io the distibution of lead weiShrs in rhe Thames dea, England. BioloSi.ll Cors.tuann, 46: 115-134

S€ s, 1. & Hmt, A. 1991. Lead loisonin8 in Muie Swm, Cygn,s oltr, in Englmd. ln: Sem, l. & Ba.on, P.l. (eds.). PM.thnd IWRB tntemational Swa Symposim, OxJord 1989. l4ilAftul Sqplen.nt | 3A3 3aa

Slffocle I.T.R. 1976. fte Aalas oJ Breetling Einls in Britain onA lfthnd. B'1O,1^ingSidaway, R. 1988. Sport, Kreation d natue .olEration: Conflid or CHp.r.tion? Stolrs O,d.ii Si,/y 32, Sports

Comcil lnndonSidaway, R. 1994. Recreation d the nahual hoitage a resemh review. Serrs,l Nafaral Henkle Rditu Na. L5

Sidaway, R.M. & Thompso& D.B.A. 1991. Uplmd receation: the limits oI a..eptable .han8€. aLls 12:3:l-39Smit, C. & Piersna, T. :1989. Numbe$, midwi.te. dist ibltion an.l miEralion oI wader popdations using lhe Easr

Atlatic llyway. Pp 24{3 in Boyd, H. & I'irot, J Y (ed,Smit, C.I. & Vnser, C.l.M. 1993. Effects of distulbance on shFlluays ond resne netuo*s Jor udtetbnds. [4lRB Special

Plblicrtion I IWRB, Slimbridge.oartdr: a summary of etisting knowledge flom the Dutch Wadden Sea md Deltaarea. Pp. 6-19. In: Davidson, N & Rothwell, P. (eds.) Disturban.e to Waterlowl On Estudies. Wdrgr stldy G.o!pB knn 68, Spe.ial Iss e

Smith, KW. 1983. IE starus and disrribuhon of waders lre€ding on w.t lowlmd grNlmds in England md Wales. BrlStLd! 30: 1n-792

Smitlr, L.M., P€dersorL R.L. & (miBki, R.M. 1989. Habitnt nanagdneflt lat miyting .nd tuitkn ! uat.tft l in NorthA,,sri.n. Texas Tech. Universily Press, Tex6

Solnan, V.E.!. 1945. The {ologi.al relatiore oI pike, Esor l,.i"s, d w.terfowl. E.olw :157 770Sports Comcil :1991. A diaest o/sports starsri.s/or &e U(. 3'r EdinonSports ColNil 1992. A counbysnle kt Spdt. A Palnv Jat Spon nntl Renentio,. Sports Coun.il, tnndon.Spray, C.J. 1997. Frshwats Qu1iry: ddining tlE indelimble? pp 389:lO5.In lootr! P.1.,& How.ll, D.L. (edo -4sssi,3

rlE recftotion i|lte of lnttl uotds: dE uK erperience.

SFay, CJ. & Ba.on, A. 1997 A wate. compmies' lcpective. a p€rsonal vie. !! 4552 in,4..css ,o W,rer Sr,nflaacc# ot nd$ antl tueft\,n! Coutryside R(ftatim Netwrk, Ca.difi.

Sp.a, CJ. & Miln., H.. 1981i. Tte incidse oI lead poi$ning am@g Wh@per md Mute Swm Crsn,s .ya,!s md C.

olol in S.otl.nd 8rnl. Co,s. 64: 265-281

Spra, CJ., Colm.n, A.E. & Colenan, J.T. 2003. Mute Swm Cy3,/s.lor. pp 146-148 in WernuD,. C.V., Tom, M.P.,

Mar.hant, J.H, Clark, I.A., Sinwddena, G M & Brillie, S.R. (eds) ?he Mtrdhon aras: Maoa etts ol the BtulN oJ Blitoindrd I/ci,,/.T & A.D. Poyser, l-ondon,

REFER€NCE5

Stdt, M. 1993. Studies on the effe.ts of di!tu.bace on staAing &mt c€ese a progress eporL Watlt Stutly Ctobp Bulletit68: 29-34

Stme, 8.H., Seds, I., Craswi.k, P.A., Gr.Bory, R D., Gibbons, D.W., Rehliscb M.M., Aebis.her, N.l. & Reid, J.B 1997

Population etimates of bnds in Britain a.d in th. Unit d (ingdom. Bnrish Air& 90: 1-22

Stroud, D.A. 1992a. Sta,lrotlj suspe$ia oJ uildfauling i yDde tuaatht: ftDiN tf past uhter ueathet o d a.tioas. loinrNatue Coreeryation Comittee Repoii No. 75

Shoud, D.A. 192b. Grcmbnn Whiteltunted CN* .n ffidtion plal tlK Ioint Nature Comeration Colrmiiie, Petdbor-

Strcud, D.A. :1997. Prcposal for int€mtional action plm dd specnlst mtwDrl for globally th.eatmed wadeN. Wad"rStutl! Croup Bulletin a2: 34 37

Shoud, D.A. in pBS. Waterfowl disturbmce in Elmpe: problm md solutim. flE S,ilt r a-x.Stroud, D.,4., Mudge, G.P. & Pienkowsli, M.W. 1990. P/otectiry Intmnt ,nnlly lnportant Bitul Sites. A R@i af ntc LLC

Spe.ial Ptutection Ared Netunlt i, Cr.nt E/itai,. Nature Conserancy Council, Peterloroud.Sukolp, H 19n. Eflets of m.n, 6pecially rcc.eational activities, oh littoDl ftacrophytes. Hydtul'ioloSu 12i 331-340

S!mme.s, D.W., Gils, N. & lvilli., DJ. \997. Restontion af tueritu ttuut habilats. lirlkrirs Te.\nnal n/t flldl 1. EnvimntASen y R&D Te.hni.al Report W18. Envircnmcnt Agcn.y, Brttol

Swales, S. & CvHara, K. 1983. A short-term stldy of the effe.ts of a habihr imprevment Plogrm€ on the d&ributionmd abmdm.e of fish stocks in a small lowlmd river in Sh.opshire. Iisna"'.s Marnae,rnt 14:135144

Swemen, C.,If,opol.l, M.L & d€ Bruri, L.L.M. 1989. Tim€rresed Oysrer.at h.B, Hncnnropas ostalegas, . ncaseth€n intale nte. , ,i-ni Befttuiet 3A: Aa

Symmds, F.L-, tagslow, D. & Pio*owsti, M.W. 1984. Movemmts oI winterinS shorebirds within the tuth of lorth:spe.ies dillerences in usage of m intotidal complex. Biological Conemntian 2A:7a7-^5

Taapkm, J. 1982. D€ sulspo en de vogels. vo3sran.30: 194197Talml r,. C., kapu, G. L. & Iaryis, R. L. 1982. Habitat use by Maldd b.oods in South Central No*h Dakora /o!ftal ol

WiLdlife Mrnqenett 463: 629 635

Tdisid, A. 1cl4. Etho<ologi.al studi€s of Teal wintoing in the Camgue (Rhore Delra Frd.e). t ildr6zi 25r 12!133 125Tamisie., A. :1976. Diumal activitics of Green winged Teal dd Pintail wintering in Lonisia\a. WtlJaul27:79-32Tdftisicr, A. & Saint4erand, T. 1981. Stltiomehcnts d'oiscaul d'cau d cha* de nuit dam Is depdtements otiers de

l.an.e. Ald,/a 49: 81-93

Tanner, M.L 1976. WdI., /esources and tuetbaAs in Eflgln d d,d Wdias. Pro...dings ol Conference on Recreation andCoNNation in wat€r de6. Royal So.iery for the En ouagement oI Afts

'f ffiL M.t. 7979. WiLlfc@l, FJstuin nna Reoeatim. A report to ihe Water Sp e Ammity ComissioL Report No.5Temple L & J. 1982. The Euopem Comunity Dnecrive on bird coBwarior BioloSicol Canreftan.n 22: 77 25

Thom, GJ. 1E78. a,.editr8 and Ieedins ecatos! ol tuotdftut at iE oue woshes, En\tafld. phD thesir CNAAIhoms, G.l. 1982. M aSement of veSetation at wetlands. In: Scoit, D.A. Ma,,31 g tuetla ds dnd &en bn.ls. |\NRB,

Thomtr, G.I., Perim, C.M. & Se s, J. 1982 Lead poisonin8 ard watedowl ln: Maidand & 'l!m.r (.ds.) 1987. A"ir,8nndb dliJe in lftntuakE

Thom, V.G. & Owen, M. 1995. Tmition iDw ds Ee of non ioxn shot in the United KinSdom. I44idr6al 46: 157-160

Thoms, V.G. & Poks, M.A. 1993. Lrtemtional analysG of non toxic shot adoption for warerfowling. In: ThompsonlLD. lEC,.). Ptoc*ttinss al the 21') lntetnotiawl union t Cane Bnn.gins cangress, HatiJN, Nau sratin. cdadion Eorcst

Sentir., Clltlk Riut, Ontntia. vol 2:3540Titus, J.R. & VmdnJl, L.W. :1981. Respotue of the comon lNn to @eational pesrre in the bomdary warers cmoe

ea? norttEastem Mimesota. wildltfe Ma qnphs 19: 3.59ToMshen4 D.l. 1982. The Lazarus syndrome in Crcy lilo\c6. Wadet StLd! Gtut tsrLlenn 40: 5154Towrehe.4 D. & O'Connor D. 1993. Sone effects of disturban.e to warer{owl frofr b.+diggi.g and wildfowlinS at

Lindislarn€ Nation.l Nature ReseNe, north east England. In: Davidson N. & Rothwell, P. 1993. Distrrban.. towalcrfowl on et ades. Wd"t Stud! Gtoup Ba enn 6a:47-53

Trcst, RE. 19q1. An emimtion of the relariochip tEtwen ha6t ard sNival E€s of North Ameri.an wood du.Ls:196685. In: lreiLickson L.H., BuEer, G.V., Havera S.D., Graber, D.A., Knb, RE. & Taylor, T.S. (eds.). P/oeadtrgs o/fiE Notth Anencm Wood Du.fr Spldsru-, Sr LouG, Mimsora.

Trump, D.P.C., Stone, D.A., C@mbs, C.F.B. & Ie e, C.J. 1994. Mute sware in the Wylye Valley: popdation dymmicad habitat Ee. lnterEtioml lounal ol P6t Mtnoge (nt 40: 88 93

Tryon, C.A. 1954. The effect of .dp exclosures on gowth oI sutmerged aquati. veSetation in Pymatuning Lake,Pmylvmia. /o,mdr ol Mrtllfe ManrgenQtt 78: 2512s4

Tucker, G.M. & Heath, M.F. 1994. Bnds in Eurape: their cansetuoti.n stntas. BirdLiIe Conseration Seies 3. BirdliJeIntemational, CambndAe

Tuite, C.H.1982. Th. inpo.t oluovtbaki rccftotio on the @tefi@l afd.lovtl inLann@dt* in Bnkin. Report to the NaturecolEwmcy comcjl, wildfowl Ttust slihbddge.

Tuite, c. H., owm, M. & Palmts, D. :1983. lntda.tron betwen wildfowl md re.reation at LlanSlc. tike and TalybontRwoir South Wales. l4ildr@l 34: 4&63

Tuite, C.H., H so& P.R. & Ower! M. 1984. Sofrc e.oloSi.dl Ia.+oE affdting winter wildlowl disiribution on n mdwates in EnAland a.d W.les md the infln.n.. oi water-lased recrearion. Jo,r"al o/Applietl EaLW 27:11-62

Tyde rn, C.I. 1 92. The importan € oI the .los. tishinS seson to breding bnd .olrm$nid. Iturnal af Eflna nentrlMo ogenert 5: 189 296

Tydmm, C.L 1978. G/,a./ Pni 6 cmenution dr?as fit bt.diry bird co m hities. phD it6B. Bcdaord Co[eS€UK BiodiveBity A.rion Croup 2!fi7. Sretni nq th.

"an.ry ol lile: 5 leas of &e uK Rinbels,rr/ , .rid plan. DETR, London

Unde.hill, M.C., Killy, J.S., Bell, M.C. & Robinrhwa e I.7993. Ute lf lDatobadizs ih sorth uest La dm by atat iauL Aninnen\otion ol ke Ir.tats o|Iccnry distributioL abmdance nnA .a lm@it! srructur.. Rcpart to Thmes Warer Urititica Ltdand Endnh Natue. WWI W.tlands A.lvi$ry SNic Lrd, Slimbri.lA€

UniveGity of Drighton 20l}2. WatcrBretl SNn an.1 Rem.timi ,r /,.rs. I.lepot to ihe Deparrmcnt of Agicultuer lood mdRlrrl Afiair, Edghton.

van Dan, C. & Asbnk, S. (eds.).7997 Comnnnts oflt1hur4, i,reles/s. tKC natuur beh€er, WaScnirgm, Nerherlddsvan dc llciligenbq& T. 1987. Efie.rs oI me.hani.al md llfuual h 6ring of lugwom Armnoh ruina on the bcnthi.

fauna of tidal flats in the Dur.h wadden sea. Brilogi.,l Crrnrenotian 39.. 165 Vav Lidcn, M.R., Kofiijber& K. & Platteeuw, M. (eds.). 1995. Ridi.g m rhe .rcsr of a wavs possit itis md limitarions

for a tliiving popnlation of comormts in lm-dominated wetlandi A/d", 83i 1 338van l€rden, M. R., Pie.sm4 T. & Lindeboom, R. 1993. Comp.titive food exploirarion of smelt Osmerus epslmus by

Great Crested GretEs Podieps -,stat"s d pdh Pa.dl,"iatili ar Lale Usrein€o, The N.rhelmds. O{oidgi, 93: 463-471

Vmey, H. & Crootes,I.A. :1 9 Th. el:.. ts rf recreond d uiL{tu1 nt Llangars. loke, At8,srsq,r.,ldl I9d9. UnpublishedrePo

Vini.omb€, K.E. 1975. me "nna\emeflt

af tedeatian nni conset"ntion dt (:heu Valley lafr. ,4"0r. Unpnbliehed thesis.Univesity ColleSe of Swmea.

\1.8,l'.1986. The iryn t of dare ba*d ftdeanon oh dt M.ad@ bi s aJ ttu PaAa nert to th! shot6. tn: tUFRa s6.Ot, t to*d t|le lhnd lflteftongt sr Meenns 7984 tu Thr Ncth.iands, I)tnno* and Suaien, Stote Forert Setuid in Ttu Nctlelnfltls,Utrech

Vos, P., Pelzer, R.H.M. & Orlem, A.B.M. 1987. Re.rearie en troedvogels in heid.€i.bi€den shabr{nse m Eroore heide.Bos d Redeotic 75. Afdeling S.ociologisch Onderzoek r.b.!. Bos, Naruu & La.ds.h.op, Stersbosb€heer, Urrecht.

lzb Wader Study Group. 1992. The Odessa ftotocol. Wdel Srxdy cntp Btll- 65:10-72W d, D. 1990. Rereation on inlmd lowlmd wareibodi€s: DGs afi*t hds? RSP! C. scadro, Rene 1990. RSPBW d, D. & Anilrss,I. 1993. Wate.lowl and rc@tional dGruba.e o. idmd wai€rs. Bnksh Wldtife 4: 227 229Wabnoud, B.R. :1983a. The eftus oI.ercatio a.tivitie on wintEins waterfowl. P/o.ecdi,a of n SmpEiutn on the subje.t

al @ildl4i on tun dd. ue tnns. ARC Wildfowl Cdtre, C.eat Li ord.Wahn@gh, D.R. 19r$b- Ttu elE ts m tuildf'tu] of treotian ot td!tuoin in ttu nid Tknt anlley. rflem Trent Watci Althodty.Wcl.h, H. 196. Mdaging Waret. Coffemanon tuchfliqud lot ltuland wtlaflds. tsSpB, Sndy.Wcller, M.W. 197lJ. Mam8ement oI Irehwatcr oarshes for wildrife. In: Coo.L R., Wtigtum, D. & Simpso., R (eds.).

Ft shudtet uetlands. A.ademir Pr*, Ncw YorlWestqber& A.E., Munhead, L.B., Donnison, A. & Bell, M.C. 1994. Aa ds.$,r.ri / the pis! dnd prcseflt otnithabgicdt

impottafle ol Nott\tnbridn watet Lttl.'s rcsem.irs and th. 4J..t! ol disr"tbnfl.. an lzt.tbnds uith pntadtht ftlernce tiBakchifl, Bddcth@tl atul Scali,a Dd,, Rcsenoirs. The Wildlowl & W€tlalds Trusr, Slinbridg€

Westerbe.S , A.E. & SPray, C.I. 1996. Ifl"6a,tatiry the elfeck of rngling nd othet re.tearioflnl octi,ities on uattbirds atftseflons it Notth-cast Eflglo,l. Unpuuished mmus.ript, The Wildfowl & Werlands 'r'tus! Slimbndge

White, G.I.1986. KGV R.scNon. Eff€ct of boddsaiiing. Unpublished reportWhire, P. S. & Pnken, S. T. A. :1985. Natual distubme d parch d)mamics: m introductim. p lt3 ln: S. T. A. picketr

& P. S. White (€d, Tr" Eaio3y .'f Nntrtul Distwbonc. nnd Po,.it D!,,fln!. A.adoic ltes, Ncw YorkWhite, G.1993. An,sscs etof the ue afld tuource of the be Vnllev Pn,* @ith rp..iol rclita@ k uatzthltds |,e. Val],ey

Regional P k Aurhority, [email protected] Robimo& R. 1982. lntmd .nd saltmarsh leeding of wintsing Bre.t Ceese in Essex. l 4idrtpt 33: 113-118Whitmor€, T.N., Rmsome, M & Wolsrmholme, R. 1995. lnlu.nce al nftatioflat us. ol aeft)oits tp.n the mntubktoticdl

quoliry aJuateL Unpublished Repo.t, Madow, WRc Irl-C.

WilliaBs, M.J. 1994. Prcgle$ in rhe.onseration of New Zeal.n.l's threarened watcrtowl- Il,tRB ThreatenedwdterJaatlRc*ati Cto p Ntu.l.ttut 5:3 6. [WRB, SlimbridSe, UK

William, M.J. & Roddiclt C. 1973. Breding pedorm .e oI thc Cey Du.k lms s /.Lib , Md]. d AnN ptat ahfi.l@dd their hybrids in .aptivity - l ternitidol Zoa yeatuaok 73: 2,69

WhJield, D.K & WinJi.ld, l.j. 1994. Posible competitive interactio.s betws @etrinrering tufted duck (Avrry, fu1,f,llc)md fish populariom of Lough Neagh, Northm Ifelmd: siden.e trcm diet studies. Hldtobialogin 279/ O:3n-3A6.

wolt w.1., Reijmders, PJ.H. & Sbit, C.I. 1982. The d1{ts of reation on the wadden sea ccosystm tuybut few lmwers. Ir Lu.k, G. & Michaeli$, H. (eds) sdtnleenfeihr M.E.L.E.., Reihe A: AgtL@ wissds.h zts:a5-707.

Wood H. & Oates, R. 1999. I2at1 Fotudhl lt Wildve: ptuntoting biditc\iry thraqh LNd Eniraflhtnt Ag.nq Adian plins.RSPB, Smdy.

Wdght, R. M. 1990 Asp{ts of the ecology of EreM Atnntis bnna L. in a gravell pit lake ad rhe effdts oI r.dlcingpopulation dmsfy. Jo! ai o/ F6h Biolag! 3r: 629 634

Wright, R.M. 1991. Altemlive shategis oI pike asr L.,,s mmag€mn| lnr /rt /d.rion! beru*n fsl6tid nnd iE doira -wnL IFM ,tud! Cat6e 22, Unive8ity of Abod&r, September 1991

Wight, R. M. & Phillips, V. tr. 1992. Ch ges in rhc.qr.ri. legetation oI two gravcl pft hkes aJt€r reducing the lGhpoPulation density. ar"dhc Batanlt 43: 4149

Yaldei, D.W. 1992. Ihe htlumce oI recreational disturban.e on .omon smdpipers A.6ns hypoltucc ]ft€ding by mu!1dd reservoir in Englmd. BiobSnol Cosem on 61:749

Yald6, D.w' & Yalden, P.E.l9A9a. cold. Plden rn.l rectenonol dist ftorce- C&fia.t SlNey Reporl No. 64, NatueC@ancy Coucil, t"dinbusfi

Yaldo, PE. & YaLlerr D.l,!. 198%. IlE mitivity of bre€ding cdd6 Ptovers Pluvralis apfidiG io hrllrm intrudeE-Binl Study 361 4+55

Yald€r! D.W- & Yaldm, P.E. 190. ReEtional dGtub.re of breding coldo Plov€B Plsaialis api.ona. Biolgoi1lConsmation 51 243 262

Z€geB P. M. 193. invl@d v6 vebtoring op het E€.haE v wadarylg- Wallldbull A 33-7Zwtts.1q72. Vmtotin\ w Mdao*el! WdtLnb l T. 7-72

127

waterbirds \u0026 wetland recreation handbook. a review of issues and management practice

Documents