Schlacher Thomas A, Schoeman David S, Jones Alan R, Dugan Jenifer E, Hubbard David M, Defeo Omar, Peterson Charles H, Weston Michael A, Maslo Brooke, Olds Andrew D, Scapini Felicita, Nel Ronel, Harris Linda R, Lucrezi Serena, Lastra Mariano, Huijbers Chantal M, Connolly Rod M
School of Science and Engineering, The University of the Sunshine Coast, Q-4558 Maroochydore, Australia.
Division of Invertebrates, The Australian Museum, Sydney, NSW 2010, Australia.
J Environ Manage. 2014 Nov 1;144:322-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.05.036. Epub 2014 Jul 9.
Complexity is increasingly the hallmark in environmental management practices of sandy shorelines. This arises primarily from meeting growing public demands (e.g., real estate, recreation) whilst reconciling economic demands with expectations of coastal users who have modern conservation ethics. Ideally, shoreline management is underpinned by empirical data, but selecting ecologically-meaningful metrics to accurately measure the condition of systems, and the ecological effects of human activities, is a complex task. Here we construct a framework for metric selection, considering six categories of issues that authorities commonly address: erosion; habitat loss; recreation; fishing; pollution (litter and chemical contaminants); and wildlife conservation. Possible metrics were scored in terms of their ability to reflect environmental change, and against criteria that are widely used for judging the performance of ecological indicators (i.e., sensitivity, practicability, costs, and public appeal). From this analysis, four types of broadly applicable metrics that also performed very well against the indicator criteria emerged: 1.) traits of bird populations and assemblages (e.g., abundance, diversity, distributions, habitat use); 2.) breeding/reproductive performance sensu lato (especially relevant for birds and turtles nesting on beaches and in dunes, but equally applicable to invertebrates and plants); 3.) population parameters and distributions of vertebrates associated primarily with dunes and the supralittoral beach zone (traditionally focused on birds and turtles, but expandable to mammals); 4.) compound measurements of the abundance/cover/biomass of biota (plants, invertebrates, vertebrates) at both the population and assemblage level. Local constraints (i.e., the absence of birds in highly degraded urban settings or lack of dunes on bluff-backed beaches) and particular issues may require alternatives. Metrics - if selected and applied correctly - provide empirical evidence of environmental condition and change, but often do not reflect deeper environmental values per se. Yet, values remain poorly articulated for many beach systems; this calls for a comprehensive identification of environmental values and the development of targeted programs to conserve these values on sandy shorelines globally.
复杂性日益成为沙质海岸线环境管理实践的标志。这主要源于在满足公众日益增长的需求（如房地产、娱乐）的同时，协调经济需求与具有现代保护伦理的沿海使用者的期望。理想情况下，海岸线管理应以实证数据为基础，但选择具有生态意义的指标来准确衡量系统状况和人类活动的生态影响是一项复杂的任务。在此，我们构建了一个指标选择框架，考虑了当局通常处理的六类问题：侵蚀；栖息地丧失；娱乐；渔业；污染（垃圾和化学污染物）；以及野生动物保护。根据可能的指标反映环境变化的能力以及广泛用于判断生态指标性能的标准（即敏感性、实用性、成本和公众吸引力）对其进行评分。通过该分析，出现了四种广泛适用且在指标标准方面表现也非常出色的指标类型：1.）鸟类种群和群落的特征（如丰度、多样性、分布、栖息地利用）；2.）广义的繁殖/生殖性能（尤其适用于在海滩和沙丘上筑巢的鸟类和海龟，但同样适用于无脊椎动物和植物）；3.）主要与沙丘和潮上带海滩区域相关的脊椎动物的种群参数和分布（传统上侧重于鸟类和海龟，但可扩展到哺乳动物）；4.）生物群（植物、无脊椎动物、脊椎动物）在种群和群落水平上的丰度/覆盖度/生物量的复合测量。当地的限制因素（如在高度退化的城市环境中没有鸟类，或在悬崖背向的海滩上没有沙丘）和特定问题可能需要替代指标。指标——如果选择和应用正确——提供了环境状况和变化的实证证据，但通常本身并不反映更深层次的环境价值。然而，许多海滩系统的价值仍未得到充分阐明；这需要全面识别环境价值，并制定有针对性的计划，以在全球范围内保护沙质海岸线上的这些价值。
